Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee
Wednesday, 10th May, 2017 7.00 pm

Venue: Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham, RG40 1BN

Contact: Arabella Yandle  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

126.

Apologies

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

An apology for absence was submitted from Councillor Michael Firmager

127.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 26 April 2017

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

An amendment was made to the Minutes of the Committee held on 26 April 2017, namely to correct the spelling of the name of the first speaker on application 163264 as Andrew Waters.

 

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 26 April 2017, together with the amendment as outlined above, were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

Members' Update pdf icon PDF 182 KB

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.

 

128.

Declaration of Interest

To receive any declaration of interest

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

129.

Applications to be Deferred and Withdrawn items

To consider any recommendations to defer applications from the schedule and to note any applications that may have been withdrawn.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

No applications were recommended for deferral, or withdrawn.

 

130.

Application no 170083 - Kentwood Farm West pdf icon PDF 499 KB

Recommendation:  Approval

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Reserved Matters application pursuant to Outline Planning Consent O/2013/2295 for the erection of 225 dwellings, associated amenity space, landscaping, garages, parking and carports, allotments, internal roads, pathways, drainage and the construction of a new access from Warren House Road (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale to be considered); the construction of a section of the Northern Distributor Road (NDR) within the development site, including footways and associated highway works (accessed from approved access on Warren House Road).

 

Applicant: Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 5 to 40.

 

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

 

·         Proposed replacement of Condition 1, to whit that permission be subject to the signing of a Deed of Variation to the S106;

·         Proposed deletion of Condition 9;

·         Proposed amendment of Condition 13 listing revised plans;

·         Proposed additional Conditions pertaining to the Highway Adoption Plan, visibility splays, and highway construction details, and

·         Proposed amendment to informative 15 regarding these Conditions.

 

In response to Member questions, the Service Manager, Highways Development Management, stated that the development met council standards and that the number of spaces around the flats had been increased in response to comments.  The main roads on the development had footpaths.  Where there were cycleways and footpaths, they shared the same space in line with guidance.

 

Regarding the adoption of the portion of the Northern Distributor Road (NDR) that ran across the site, he explained that there was a section 38 agreement which governed the work.  An advanced payment code (APC) bond would be secured by the Council from the developer and this would not be released until the road and associated works had been completed to council satisfaction and in accordance with approved details.

 

Further to Member comments, it was agreed that Informative 8 would be amended to make it clear that it did not apply to the NDR and was only related to the internal estate roads.

 

Resolved:  That Application no 170083 be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Agenda pages 5 to 40, the amendments, deletion and additional condition as laid out in the Members’ Update, completion of the legal agreement relating to Deed of Variation in relation to affordable housing and the amendment to the informative 8 set out above.

 

 

131.

Application no 170035 - Land to the West of Shinfield pdf icon PDF 437 KB

Recommendation:  Approval

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Reserved Matters application for a two form entry (2FE) primary school, including all hard & soft play areas, school car parking, attenuation pond (habitat area), landscaping and associated drop off car parking.

 

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

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 41 to 68.

 

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

 

·         Proposed amendment of Condition 2 listing additional plans;

·         Proposed amendment of Condition 4 regarding hours of use;

·         Additional information to be included in the summary information, and

·         Corrections to the report regarding the plan’s adherence to the principles in the outline plan and the size of the football pitch.

 

Piers Brunning, Service Manager for Policy, Strategy and Partnerships, Spoke in favour of the application.  He explained that primary school places in the Shinfield area were at a premium, with both the existing schools completely full, and that the proposed developments in the area would increase demand further.  He stated that the Council had worked very closely with the Floreat Education Trust.  He commented on the modern design, stating that it fitted with other new schools being built nationally.  He was confident that the quality of learning and teaching would be enhanced by the design.  The school was intending to be active in the development and maintenance of its travel plan.

 

In response to a Member query, the Case Officer stated that the school’s expansion would occur in phase over 7 years, increasing each year as the pupils went up the school and starting from reception.  In response to a Member query regarding colours, the Case Officer stated that the final colour of the rendering would need to be approved, as set out in Condition 3.

 

In regards to parking for staff, the Service Manager, Highways Development Management, stated that the allocated spaces had been calculated for the average of FTE staff inline with recent new and extended schools within the Borough.  The operator for this new school became known through the process and as such higher FTE was established.  However based on the current proposed parking for staff and additional parking also made available within the site, the scheme proposed still provided adequate parking provision to meet the Council’s standards. A further 10 spaces were also indicated on the plan for future potential expansion to a three form of entry school which was in line with Council standards but would be considered at a later stage.  He went on to state that new development surrounding the school would result in an increase of 1200 plus properties that would be able to make use of the new footpath and cycleway network provided within the development and linking to it.  The Travel Plan which was also secured through the application would play a big part delivering a sustainable school within such a new development that will be built out alongside the school.

 

In response to Member questions around health and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 131.

132.

Application no 163610 - Belscot, Reading Road pdf icon PDF 279 KB

Recommendation:  Approval

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Full application for the proposed change of use of the land and buildings from Use Class B1 (Business) and B8 (Storage & Distribution) to Use Class B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage & Distribution).

 

Applicant:  Mr P White

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 69 to 86.

 

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

 

·         Proposed additional condition regarding boundary treatments, and

·         Proposed amendment to Condition 5 regarding hours of operation.

 

Members had visited the site on 24 March 2017.

 

The Case Officer proposed the following amendments:  that in paragraph 20 on p 79, the reference to Condition 11 in the report should read Condition 5.

 

Stephen Harrow, resident, representing a group of fellow residents, spoke against the application.  He stated that the planned use of the site would cause harm because of noise.  He considered that the noise attenuation methods would not work and that the ventilation system would, itself, create noise.  He indicated that there were many vacant sites on industrial parks in the Borough that were more suitable for the proposed use.  He suggested that Environmental Health be able to access the site to assess its impact on at all times and that there should be further restrictions on guard dogs, noise, operating times and distance from surrounding properties.

 

Peter White, applicant, spoke in favour of the application.  He described the company and its development and explained that the site had a lot of potential so the company had invested a lot of time and money to date in clearing it.   It was a small scale business that would bring employment into the area.  He outlined the measures that had been taken to work with residents, including invitations to their other works, and stated that feedback had been positive. 

 

Simon Weeks, Ward Member for Finchampstead South, spoke in opposition to the application, explaining that there had been objections made by residents and Finchampstead Parish Council.  He cited Planning Policies CP1 and CP3, which spoke to the impact of a development, stating that the site lay between or opposite residences and that it was not appropriate for B2 use.  He suggested that an industrial estate was more suitable for the business and that he was concerned about compliance if mitigation methods did not work.  He asked that, if the Committee were minded to approve the application, Conditions 4 and 5 be amended to reduce the operating hours.

 

In response to Member questions, the Case Officer stated that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encouraged commercial activity and that this needed to be weighed against other harm.  He explained the process that had been taken to assess the level of noise and the mitigation methods that would be adopted. The acoustic consultant had provided all the information requested by Environmental Health ant the operating hours of the business and possible noise levels were considered acceptable when compared to the ambient noise levels created by road traffic.

 

He went  ...  view the full minutes text for item 132.

133.

Application no 170424 - 56-60 Finch Road, Maiden Erlegh pdf icon PDF 273 KB

Recommendation:  Approval

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Full planning application for the proposed erection of 6no dwellings, to include 2no affordable dwellings, together with associated parking and landscaping following demolition of no's 58 and 60 Finch Road.

 

Applicant:  Burwood Homes and Wokingham Housing Limited

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 87 to 104.

 

·         Proposed additional information on housing density, and

·         Proposed amendment to Condition 9 regarding unallocated parking spaces.

 

The Case Officer proposed the following amendments and additional conditions:

 

·         Condition 2 should be amended as follows to reflect the revised parking layout submitted:

 

This permission is in respect of the submitted application plans and drawings numbered ref: 2151A -100 Rev A; 2151A -101; 2151A -102 Rev F; 2151A -103; 2151A -104 Rev A; 2151A -105 Rev A; 2151A -106 Rev B; 2151A -107; 2151A -108; 2151A -109 Rev A; 2151A -110 Rev E; 2151A -111 and 2151A -112. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the application form and associated details hereby approved.

 

·         Condition 20 on page 91 should be amended as follows:

 

Notwithstanding the provisions of Classes F of Part 1 of the Second Schedule the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no hard surfacing shall be laid to between the front elevation of the dwellings and the highway unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason: To ensure the soft landscaping to the front of the site maintained and to preserve the character and appearance of the area.

 

·         Add the following highway condition:

 

No development shall commence until the off-site works comprising construction of a 2.0m wide footway for the length of the site and adjacent to Finch Road have been provided in accordance with details to be submitted and approved by the LPA.

Reason: to ensure the public highway is built to an adoptable standard.  

 

Michael Lee, Agent, spoke in favour of the application, thanking officers for the work of the Planning Department and explaining how officers had worked with the applicant to enhance the design, including the addition of two extra parking spaces.  He indicated that the development fell within a major development location.  The design was sympathetic to the 2d nature of properties in the surrounding area.  The planned houses would strengthen the linear plan and would respect the amenity of neighbouring properties.  There had been no objection from Highways and environmental considerations had been fully considered.  The site met local and national guidelines and was fully sustainable.  He noted that plots 3 and 4 had car ports as opposed to garages.

 

Ken Miall, Ward Member for Maiden Erlegh, spoke in favour of the application, stating that he and his fellow Ward Members were fully in support of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 133.

134.

Application no 170360 - Unit 21, Suttons Park Avenue, Bulmershe pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Recommendation:  Approval

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal:  Application to vary condition 28 of planning consent 161666 (15/9/2016) to allow changes to delivery hours

 

Applicant:  Standard Life Assurance Ltd.

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 105 to 124.

 

BhavashVashi, Agent, spoke in support of the application.  He suggested that the changes to delivery hours should be seen in the context of a site that was open 24 hours a day.  He stated that the company managed similar sites around the country and was seen as a good neighbour.  The deliveries would take place in a secluded area and offloading would all occur in an enclosed dock environment.  The company had agreed to a year’s trial.

 

Alison Swaddle, Ward Member for Bulmershe and Whitegates, stated that there had some been some concern amongst residents when the initial application had come to Committee.  The proposed change in hours would directly impact families.  If managed, the company could work within the set hours.

 

In response to Member questions, the Case Officer clarified the changes and stated that the conditions required that deliveries that arrived outside the allotted hours would turn off their engines and refrigeration units.  The vehicles would only reverse in the service area.  The change to hours would facilitate the company’s operation as it would allow stocking to take place outside shop hours.  At the end of the year’s trial, the company would need to re-submit the application.

 

Further to Member comments, it was agreed that Condition 11 be amended to require that reverse beacons be switched off.

 

Resolved:  That Application no 170360 be approved subject to the conditions set out in Agenda pages 105 to 124 and the amendment to Condition 11 as laid out above.

135.

Exclusion of the Public

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as appropriate.