Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 10 January 2024

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 January 2024 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive any declaration of interest

Councillor Neal declared a personal interest in item 69 application 232475 on the grounds of being part of the Earley Town Council Planning Committee where the item was considered, but knowing that the item would come to Wokingham Borough Council Planning Committee, he took no part in that discussion.

Councillor Smith declared a personal interest in item 68 application 230074, he had read the report and would listen to the presentation, after which he would make up his own mind.

To consider any recommendations to defer applications from the schedule and to note any applications that may have been withdrawn.

There were no items to be deferred or withdrawn.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of new mixed used development of 60no. dwellings plus Class E commercial floorspace, associated public and private amenity space, new pedestrian route, 36 car parking spaces, 1 loading bay and cycle space for 115 bikes with 101 for residential in storage spaces. Following demolition of 19 & 20 Market Place and partial retention of 21 Market Place.

Applicant: Devonshire Metro Limited

The Committee considered a report on this application, set out in agenda pages 17 to 108.

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

• Town Council and ward member comments
• Clarification regarding the extent of land in Council control

Louise Timlin, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. She understood that the site would provide a high-quality development. However, she objected to the height of the 4 storey part of the development and added that it was not in keeping with the character of the area. She referenced CP3 from the Council’s planning policy and said that this development was contrary to policy on height and massing. She mentioned a negative impact on the community garden. She emphasised the lack of any affordable housing in the application as a negative.

Patricia Donkin, resident, spoke in objection to the application. She mentioned that Howard Road was a one track cul-de-sac, that was in poor condition and that the application would bring extra traffic to the road, which would have an adverse impact on the safety of young children and the elderly residents. She referenced the Council’s vision which mentioned tackling traffic congestion but was of the view that this application would not support this aim. She explained that Wokingham’s services are already overloaded, including health and school services. She added that there was a lack of quality affordable homes provided in the application.

Rosalind Graham, agent, spoke in favour of the application. She said that there had been 18 months of dialogue with officers, stakeholders, specialist consultants and the local community. She explained that the application was on an under used brownfield site and would attract diverse new business to the area. She mentioned that the design and scale of the application kept the character of the town centre and added that the apartments had generous access. The application was supported by the Highways officer. She explained that this was a regeneration of a key opportunity site in Wokingham Town Centre and would help meet local housing need with high quality homes.

Jane Ainslie, ward member, spoke in objection of the application. She spoke of safety issues on Howard Road if it was used as a cut through as well as the car parking plans, which would also contribute to safety concerns. She added that Cockpit Path had plenty of school children going to Primary School, whose safety could potentially be put at risk. She requested that if the application were to be approved that parking permits were made 24/7 to stop overflow parking into Howard Road.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Outline application with all matters reserved except for access, for the proposed erection of a 64 bed care home (Use Class C2) with site access, parking, hard and soft landscaping and other associated works following demolition of existing commercial buildings.

Applicant: Bewley Homes

The Committee considered a report on this application, set out in agenda pages 109 to 214.

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

• Access at Blagrove Lane
• Revised Growth Strategy
• Future C3 Provision
• Wokingham Town Council Comments
• Briefing note prepared by the applicant shared with the Committee
• Correction p119 bullet point 4 ‘Notwithstanding, on balance, the minor incursion into greenfield land does not outweigh the benefits the proposal presents’

All members of the committee attended a site visit except Councillors Smith and Skuse.

Louise Timlin, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. She emphasised to the Committee that this application was in an unsustainable location and added that there were a lack of bus services for residents, staff and visitors. She explained that the access from Blagrove Lane could not take extra traffic, there were issues with a lack of footpaths and narrow roads regarding the safety of residents, she referenced the loss of biodiversity as a negative.

Ian Andrews, resident, spoke in objection to the application. He noted that the application was only looking at access to the site and was surprised to see a report about the care home itself. He referenced policy CP4 and felt the entrance was in a dangerous location on a single-track road. He explained that traffic turning out of the new site would back up traffic to Evendons Lane. He explained that a recent sinkhole issue had backed up traffic along the road, increasing traffic on Blagrave Lane, and that this had been a disaster. He referenced another 30 bed care home and how he had heard of the 24/7 nature of that site with 60 cars per day at the site as well as visitors. 

Peter Home, agent, spoke in favour of the application. He commented that due to the status of the  Council’s Local Plan and Housing Land Supply, the tilted balance applied, meaning that the application should be granted approval unless the impact of doing so significantly and demonstratively outweighed the benefits when assessed against policy. He mentioned that there was a significant unmet need for care within the Borough. He added that the site was previously developed. He stressed that the applicant’s team had worked with officers to minimise harm and to fit the site into the existing landscape. He mentioned that the new access was safer than the current one and confirmed there would be a minibus for staff use. There had been no objections from statutory consultees.  The site would provide 50 new jobs and there was a biodiversity net gain.

Sarah Kerr, ward member, spoke in objection to the application. She felt the negative aspects had been significantly down played in the officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Outline planning application for the proposed erection of 23 dwellings with associated access and 15 carparking spaces for the local Primary school. Access only to be considered (with Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale to be reserved) (amended description) REVISED PLANS.

Applicant: Helmsley Land Ltd

The Committee considered a report on this application, set out in agenda pages 215 to 318.

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

• Conflicts with the spatial strategy
• Comments from Children’s Services on school places
• List of nearby facilities
• Transport Statement
• Re-consultation
• Public rights of way

All councillors attended a site visit except Councillors Smith, Skuse and Cornish.

Councillor Cornish mentioned that the Council had received a number of Freedom of Information requests (FOIs) regarding the application and that he had looked into the decision to defer the item to a future committee if important information had been withheld. He confirmed that he was satisfied that nothing material had been withheld and that a deferral would miss the determination period so the item might be approved automatically.

Tony Robinson, Hurst Parish Council, spoke in objection of the application. He told the committee that Hurst Parish Council submitted 2 documents giving clear evidence for refusal. He referenced previous applications in Hurst and said that many applications on greenfield sites had been refused in the past. He refuted the applicant’s view that important planning policies were outdated due to the lack of a 5 Year Housing Land Supply (5YHLS) and said this was not the Council’s stance as they had refused a 3 dwelling application in Hurst in March 2023. He emphasised that new developments needed to be sustainable, and that Hurst was an unsustainable location. He mentioned the lack of facilities in Hurst such as narrow and inadequate pavements, having to cross the A321 twice to access the village shop, no street lighting, poor bus service and no cycle lanes meaning there was an overreliance on cars.

Jessica Lake, resident, spoke in objection to the application. She also referenced previous applications in Hurst and questioned why this application was any different. She cited a lack of green space in the new development and a harm to local nature with the loss of a wildlife corridor. She felt that the site would be highly visible from School Road and result in a loss of visual amenity. She mentioned that there was unmonitored parking and that there would not be enough spaces and said there would be 50 at school time which would also cause safety concerns. She argued that if Hurst had previously been considered unsustainable then the Committee should reject this application.

Douglas Bond, agent, spoke in favour of the application. He explained that all the issues with the application had been correctly addressed. He referenced the affordable homes within the application as a positive. He argued that this part of Hurst was sustainable, and that the application was in keeping with the size of Hurst. He explained that there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval

Proposal: Full planning application for the erection of the headquarters building of European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECWMF) with access parking and landscaping, following demolition of existing buildings.

Applicant: Mace Group, on behalf of the Government Property Agency

The Committee considered a report on this application, set out in agenda pages 319 to 374.

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

• An additional condition added to the recommendations set out in Appendix 1

All councillors attended a site visit except Councillors Smith and Skuse.

Nick Paterson-Neild, agent, spoke in favour of the application. He explained that the project would be funded by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and met industry leading net-zero Carbon standards. He told the Committee that the centre was built in Shinfield in 1979 but that the current site did not provide the space required for the long-term need. He added that the building was of high architectural design quality and was in a sustainable location with great transport links. He concluded by saying this application ensured the world’s leading global weather prediction station remained in Wokingham Borough.

Councillor Smith asked whether Reading Borough Council refusing this application in full due to Highways safety was an issue. Gordon Adam reassured Members that the application wouldn’t have a major impact on traffic levels.

Members noted that this was a fantastic application and that they fully supported keeping this station in the Borough.

It was proposed by Councillor Cornish and seconded by Councillor Skuse that the application be approved.

RESOLVED: That application 232475 be approved subject to

A) Completion of a S106 agreement and;

B) Conditions as set out in the report and amended in the members update (if required) and additional condition in the Members update;

C) Should the S106 agreement not be signed by the applicant by six months of the committee resolution, delegate to the Assistant Director of Planning to refuse the application unless a longer timeframe is agreed with the Chair of Planning Committee in consultation with the Assistant Director of Planning.