Agenda item

Application no 211398 Former Showcase Cinema Car Park/Park & Ride Site, Loddon Bridge and The Bader Way Interchange, Winnersh

Recommendation: Conditional Approval

Minutes:

Proposal: Full application for the proposed change of use of the former car park to the storage of materials, shoring and temporary works equipment and vehicles associated with civil engineering business (Use Class B8), including welfare unit, gates, and fencing

 

Applicant: Hochsoll Properties Ltd

 

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 159 to 186.

 

The Committee were advised that there were no updates within the supplementary planning agenda.

 

Christian Leigh, agent, spoke in support of the application. Christian stated that there had been a productive pre-application process between the applicant and Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) officers. Christian added that the site was woefully unused, and that the use cases of the site were restricted due to the potential for flooding on the associated land. Christian stated that this application would provide a much needed viable use for the site, which would provide employment within the local area. Christian stated that the application would provide additional planting and secure fencing.

 

Prue Bray, Ward Member, commented on the application. Prue stated that the site flooded, however this did not preclude use of the site for storage purposes. Prue stated that one such flooding incident in 2007 was catastrophic, and caused a number of vehicles to be written off despite the flood warning system being in operation, as car had become marooned within the car park and could not reach the exit roads. Prue commented that she would hate to see this happen again, and asked that an informative be added to make the applicant aware that flood water had the potential to block the exit roads from the site.

 

Bill Soane commented that reference within the report to Colemans Moor Lane should have referred to Colemans Moor Road. Bill stated that he had spoken to local residents, who were mostly now content with the proposals. A few queries remained, including whether there would be any temporary tower lighting, whether there was potential for any harmful chemicals to spill into the Loddon in the event of a flood, and whether the opening hours could begin at 8am rather than 7am. Bill commented that the site flooded more frequently than every five years, and queried whether vehicles could not enter the site out of hours. Simon Taylor, case officer, clarified that tower lighting would not be allowed under conditions. Simon added that he would envisage that the vehicles would fill up with fuel off-site, meaning that no fuel would be stored at the site. Simon clarified that the 7am opening time was fairly typical for this use type as it builders required access to the materials early in the day to allow for an early start on building sites. Simon confirmed that no vehicles could access the site out of the prescribed 7am to 7pm hours.

 

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey commented that the site could get very damp and wet, and advised that the applicant should park vehicles carefully to accommodate for this. Rachelle added that this was a good use for the site in her opinion, so long as harmful chemicals were not stored on-site.

 

Andrew Mickleburgh queried how many entry and exit points were on the site and whether these allowed for a safe evacuation should there be a sudden and severe flood, queried whether a condition could be added to require an evacuation plan to be created to minimise risks of flooding damage, and queried whether the proposals could increase flooding risks to nearby residential properties. Simon Taylor stated that the flood risk assessment had discussed the associated risks on the site, and the applicant was planning to store a lot of expensive equipment on site and it was therefore in their own interest to be aware of the risk of flooding. There were no changes to the existing ground on the site, and the site was to remain open for water to pass through the fences in the event of flooding. Simon stated that an evacuation plan would not provide any additional securities for WBC, and it was in the applicants own best interest to have plans in place to ensure their equipment was not damaged by flooding.

 

Andrew Mickleburgh queried why informatives 1 and 2 could not be secured conditions, queried whether the speed limits on Bader Way in relation to the two nearby roundabouts caused any safety concerns. Justin Turvey, Operational Manager – Development Management, stated that should planning permission be granted for this application, this did not give any rights to the applicant to use the public right of way areas for storage, which was why only informatives were required in this instance. Judy Kelly, Highways Development Manager, stated that Highways officers were happy with the proposals. The existing speed limit was 40MPH, and the site had existing access established. Judy added that vehicles would turn left in to the site and left out of the site, pulling vehicles off of the main stream of traffic onto a separate lane prior to reaching the site. Judy stated that the site had previously been used as a park and ride site, with buses regularly entering and exiting the site safely.

 

Angus Ross was of the opinion that this site was unsafe to be used, due to the site being within flood zone three. Angus stated his surprise that the Environment Agency had not objected to this application on safety grounds. Angus added that he was concerned that the river Loddon could become contaminated by the vehicles and other materials being stored on the site in the event of a flood, and stated that he could not support this application.

 

Gary Cowan was of the opinion that no materials should be stored on site which could contaminate the Loddon in the event of a flood. Gary queried the level of tree removal on the site. Simon Taylor stated that condition 9 could be strengthened to state specifically what could be stored on site. Relating to trees, Simon stated that tree removal would be minimal on site.

 

Sam Akhtar raised concerns relating to part of the site being in flood zone three, and the risk of pollutants such as red diesel being released into the river in the event of a flood. Sam added that he could not support the application on this basis.

 

Pauline Jorgensen queried whether the route of the nearby cycleway would be appropriate and not place between fences, and queried whether the on-ramp was being re-opened. Simon Taylor stated that the public right of way was outside of the red line boundary for this site, however the applicant was fully open to working with WBC officers in relation to the public right of way in the future. Judy Kelly confirmed that the existing access was deemed acceptable by officers, and there were no plans to re-open the on-ramp

 

Stephen Conway proposed a new condition, which stipulated what could be stored on-site, to be agreed in consultation with the Chairman and the local Ward Members. This proposal was seconded by Chris Bowring, carried, and added to the list of conditions.

 

Andrew Mickleburgh proposed a new condition, obliging the application to develop an evacuation strategy for the site, to safeguard employees and visitors to the site amongst others. This proposal was seconded by Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey, carried, and added to the list of conditions.

 

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey commented that vehicles did drive at speed in that area, and that there was an additional exit into the adjacent cinema car park.

 

RESOLVED That application number 211398 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 160 to 164, additional condition stating specifically what could be stored on-site as resolved by the Committee, and additional condition requiring creation of an evacuation strategy for the site as resolved by the Committee.

Supporting documents: