Agenda and minutes

Venue: Virtual Meeting. View directions

Contact: Callum Wernham  Democratic & Electoral Services Specialist

Media

Items
No. Item

42.

Apologies

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

43.

Declaration of Interest

To receive any declaration of interest

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

44.

Applications to be Deferred and Withdrawn items

To consider any recommendations to defer applications from the schedule and to note any applications that may have been withdrawn.

Minutes:

There were no applications to be deferred or withdrawn.

45.

Application No.201515 - Ashridge Farm, Warren House Road, Wokingham, RG40 5QB pdf icon PDF 534 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal: Full application for the erection of 153 dwellings comprising a mix of 1,2,3 & 4 beds with associated landscaping, parking, open space, drainage; construction of a new access onto Warren House Road and Bell Foundry Lane; provision of an area of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) and all other associated development works (including demolition of existing buildings and provision of temporary site sales).

 

Applicant:  Barratt David Wilson Homes

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application as set out in agenda pages 5 to 74.

 

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included the following:

 

·       Amendment of the cited Heads of Terms on Pages 8 and 25;

·       Amendment of condition 2, to include the list of drawings to be approved;

·       Amendment of condition 25 regarding stream alignment;

·       Amendment of condition 37 regarding odour mitigation measures;

·       Additional conditions 45 and 46;

·       Clarification regarding parking space number and parking ratio;

·       Additional consultation responses;

·       Clarification regarding the installation of acoustic screens around the Odour Control Unit in order to address the noise issues associated with this, in order for it to commence use again.

 

Abby Tebboth, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application.  She stated that the Town Council was concerned about the odour levels coming from the sewage works.  The odour contouring had been noted but the Odour Impact Assessment still predicted that odour exposures across the site would potentially be two or three times the level at which odour became a nuisance, which would have a significant impact on residents’ use of their homes, gardens and the amenity space.  Abby Tebboth went on to state that the proximity of the housing to Ashridge Stream presented a considerable flood risk even if the diversion works were completed.  An area of the development was in the high level of flood risk, which was not in line with the Core Strategy.  She added that there was an increased risk of flooding to the existing houses in the area.  Abby Tebboth indicated that residents had concerns around the safety of the access to Warren House Road, to the playpark and the SANG, to existing houses.  Increased pressure on local infrastructure was also potentially an issue.  Abby Tebboth went on to state the application would develop some of the only remaining green space in Norreys.

 

Jessica Sparkes, spoke in favour of the application, on behalf of the Applicant.  She commented that the proposals had been shaped following extensive discussions with officers and consultees.  The number of dwellings now aligned with the emerging Local Plan, landscaping and open space were now increased and overall density on a par with other developments in the Strategic Development Location.   Jessica Sparkes indicated that the application would allow for the completion of the Northern Distributor Road and that additional SANG and public open space would also be provided, which would complement the existing SANG across the north of Wokingham.  The proposals also offered policy compliant affordable housing all of which would be provided within the development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

46.

Application No. 201573 - Boundoak Industrial Estate, Wokingham Lane, Arborfield, RG2 9PN pdf icon PDF 606 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Full application for the erection of 4No buildings for B1c,B2 and B8 industrial and commercial use with the addition of a sui generis Energy Centre comprising a Combined Heat and Power facility and a Lithium Ion Battery store in Unit 1 to include landscaping and access works, following demolition of the existing buildings.

 

Applicant: Musketeer Properties Ltd

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application as set out in agenda pages 75 to 120.

 

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included the following:

 

·       Amendment to condition 4 in order to allow up to two units to be occupied by the same tenant;

·       Amendment to condition 16 around walking and cycling.

 

Douglas Bond, agent, spoke in support of the application.  He stated that the site was currently an unattractive, poor quality estate which needed development.  The application would result in an improvement for tenants and employees.  Amended plans had been submitted to allay the concerns of residents.  The proposed layout was sensitive to surroundings and allowed important trees to be retained, in addition to opportunities for new native planting.  The Countryside Officer had concluded that the application would result in a minor beneficial effect to the wildlife.  Douglas Bond also commented that there would be sufficient onsite parking.  He went on to refer to improved sustainability features.  He emphasised that the proposals also included provision for an energy centre, which enhanced the scheme’s sustainability credentials. 

 

In response to a question from Gary Cowan, Judy Kelly explained that there was a pelican crossing for pedestrians on the A327M, the main strategic road to the east of the site.  There was also a bridleway (Pegasus crossing).  There was bridleway that came down to the north and to the west of the site there was a byway that continued on.  Residents had expressed concern that the uncontrolled pedestrian crossing was not well constructed.  A condition sought to improve this and a dropped kerb crossing with tactile paving would be put in place, with a continuous footway leading into the site.

 

Andrew Mickleburgh queried the number of parking spaces, including for trucks.  Judy Kelly indicated that the site usage would be a mixture of B1, C, B2 and B8 which had different parking standards.  However, parking standards would be met.  There were no specific parking places for trucks on site.

 

With regards to control of noise, Angus Ross questioned whether conditions were strong enough to control any future occupants and usages.  Jeanette Davey indicated that usage should not exceed prevailing background noise at the nearest residential property or noise sensitive property.

 

Malcolm Richards queried the machinery operating times beginning at 7am.  Jeanette Davey commented that the applicant had originally requested longer working hours.  Condition 21 covered the adjoining residents.

 

Malcolm Richards stated that the lithium-ion battery store would be vulnerable to fire risk.  Jeanette Davey emphasised that Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service had indicated that the relevant fire legislation would need to be complied with in order for a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

47.

Application No.200700 - 1, Barkham Road, Wokingham, RG41 2XR pdf icon PDF 705 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of 14 flats, 6 no. one bedroom flats, 8 no. two bedroom flats, car parking and landscaping, following the demolition of existing buildings.

 

Applicant: Cleanslate Ltd

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application as set out in agenda pages 121 to 156.

 

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included the following:

 

·       Additional condition around hours of work.

 

A statement was read out on behalf of Brian Norton, applicant, in support of the application.  The applicant had held a Pre-Application process and met with Planning Officers and Landscaping Officers.  They had had a constructive dialogue which had resulted in a number of modifications to the proposals; namely reducing its scale, improving external design features to meet the local vernacular and bolstering landscaping given its location on a Green Route.  In addition, plants that bolstered biodiversity, had been selected.  Although the Heritage Officer had, early in the process, expressed concern around the existing building’s history, very little of the original features remained and redevelopment was the only practical option.  There were some significant viability challenges due to technical requirements for remediation and poor ground conditions leading to a potential need for piling.  Despite these challenges several shared ownership flats were offered as part of the development.

 

Imogen Shepherd-DuBey, Ward Member, spoke in objection to the application.  She commented that on the whole she welcomed the application.  However, she felt that the inclusion of a lift would make the building more accessible for all.  Imogen Shepherd-DuBey questioned why solar panels were not part of the application.  In addition, she felt that more visitor parking was required and that at least one more flat should be affordable housing.

 

Pauline Jorgensen sought clarification regarding the private open space in front of the flats and queried whether the landscaping was adequate.  Janette Davey indicated that originally it had been proposed that the space in front of the flats would be communal open space.  It was now private space for five of the flats.  There was a proposal for a brick wall and planting against the brick wall which would offer a degree of privacy.  Officers were keen that the proposals complied with the government’s provisions for building a healthy life, seeking to achieve outdoor space in some form for as many residents as possible.  This had been achieved in eleven of the fourteen dwellings.  With regards to the private garden space, Officers had felt it appropriate in the location.

 

Malcolm Richards asked whether there was sufficient space for refuse vehicles to access.  Judy Kelly indicated that larger vehicles would reverse in and then come back out on to the road in a forward manner.

 

Malcolm Richards commented that a lift would be useful.  Janette Davey clarified that this was not something which could be required under planning legislation.  Rachelle Shepherd-Dubey questioned there could be an informative regarding encouraging the inclusion of a lift.

 

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey asked how the contaminated land would be treated and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

48.

Continuation of Meeting

Minutes:

At this point in the meeting 10.25pm, in accordance with Procedure Rule 8.2.9, the Committee considered a Motion to continue the meeting beyond 10.30pm, up to no later than 11pm, to enable further business on the Agenda to be transacted.  This was proposed by Chris Bowring and seconded by Simon Weeks.

 

RESOLVED That the meeting be extended past 10.30pm, up to no later than 11pm, to enable further business on the Agenda to be transacted.

 

49.

Application No.192884 - Land at Stanbury House, Basingstoke Road, Spencers Wood pdf icon PDF 356 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Full application for the proposed change of use of agricultural land to recreational use (D2 Use class) (to provide a Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space) with associated access, car park, footpaths and landscaping works.

 

Applicant:  Cooper Estates Strategic Land Limited

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application as set out in agenda pages 157 to 182.

 

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included the following:

 

·       Additional consultation response from WBC Green Infrastructure;

·       Additional condition around hours of work.

 

In response to question from Angus Ross, Graham Vaughn confirmed that condition 10 referred to the provision of a footpath link between the footpath network within the site and Shinfield Byway 25, Woodcock Lane.

 

RESOLVED:  That application 192884 be approved subject to completion of a legal agreement to secure ownership of the land for recreational use as a SANG; its maintenance in perpetuity by the Local Authority; and, a commuted sum towards maintenance, conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 158 to 163, and additional condition as set out in the Members’ Update.

 

50.

Application No 200711 Bartletts Farm, Swallowfield Road, Arborfield pdf icon PDF 405 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Carl Doran did not participate in discussions or vote on the application, having not been present at the previous Committee meeting where the item had been previously discussed.

 

This application was considered first during the meeting.

 

Proposal:  Full planning application for Installation of a Solar park to include 40000 solar photovoltaic panels, 11 inverter/transformer cabins, a single control building and associated works to include vehicle access and fencing with Environmental Statement.

 

Applicant:  Wessex Solar Energy

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application as set out in agenda pages 5 to 74 of the Supplementary Agenda.

 

Harry Cannon, resident, spoke in objection the application.  He commented that with regards to alternative sites, he heard that the Council was giving notice to tenant farmers to vacate land for the purposes of using it for solar.  This suggested that Bartletts Farm was not the only site available.  Harry Cannon stated that additional drawings and information provided did not show an elevation from the north, which would be 50ft tall and difficult to screen.  He felt that this would have a negative visual impact.

 

Richard Wearmouth, Applicant, spoke in support of the application.  He commented that their Landscape Architect and the Council’s Landscape Officer had agreed that the application had no unacceptable impacts.  Once existing screening by vegetation and topography was considered, views from the surrounding area, were limited.  There would be additional buffer zones, new hedgerows, trees, and planting.  With regards to land quality, Natural England as a statutory consultee, had not raised any concerns.  The landowner had reported low crop yields despite the application of lime and fertiliser.  During the life of the solar farm the land would not be lost, and the quality of the land would be improved as more intensive agricultural practices were temporarily moved away from and regenerative farming practices were introduced.  He reminded Members that the land would eventually return to its current use.  Richard Wearmouth asked that the application be considered on its own merits.  A Site Alternative Assessment had been provided in the application, which had set out the applicant’s systematic approach to site identification.  Richard Wearmouth added that solar parks needed to be able to connect to the Grid, to be accessible from the road network and for a landowner to be willing to accommodate it on their land.  This site met these requirements.  The site was free from National and Policy designations and Rights of Way, had an onsite Grid connection and had been made available by the landowner for use.

 

Stuart Munro, adjoining Ward Member spoke in objection to the application.  He commented that the solar farm at Sheepbridge Court had been in place for six years and that the hedging provided, provided insufficient screening.

 

Gary Cowan questioned whether the site was the most appropriate location.  He commented that it was one of the first times the Council had dealt with an application of that size and that it was a learning curve for Members and Officers.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.