Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Proposal: Full application for the erection of 5 no. detached dwellings, two with detached garages and three with internal garages and associated landscaping works including one balancing pond, 2 no. accesses with entrance gates and 1.2m post and rail fencing.

Applicant: Woodridge Developments, 11 Arkwright Road Reading RG2 0LU

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 85 to 120.

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

John Anderson, Swallowfield Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application. John stated that three-storey homes were not part of the character of the Parish, and the proposals would occupy an elevated position whilst taking centre stage within the wide site entrance. John added that the proposals would give the appearance of tall town houses within a field. John felt that the proposals were inappropriate within a countryside setting. John stated outline permission was granted in 2016 for three houses, which the Parish Council had supported on balance as an alternative to a busy garden centre. John stated that this permission had removed permitted development rights, however this had been subsequently ignored and the proposals were now for 5 tall dwellings with a separate driveway leading to plot one. John was of the opinion that this was a further attempt to increase the size and scope of the development, which would further harm the character of the area and was a step too far.

Lisa Burns-Peake, resident, spoke in objection to the application. Lisa stated that loss of privacy to her home as a result of the proposals would have a huge impact on their quality of life. Lisa was of the opinion that the proposed dwellings were utterly out of keeping with the housing stock on the road, and added that there had been subsequent increases in the proposed size of the development of the site since 2016.

Tristan Parsons, neighbour and on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application. Tristan stated that he lived in the property two doors down from the site, and five years ago there had been an issue with travellers accessing the site and entering his back garden. As a result, the site was purchased with a view to develop. Tristan stated that he was now working from home alongside his wife whilst their children took part in home schooling when required due to Covid-19. Tristan stated that his family would be moving into plot one, and the proposed attic rooms would be added to the other four properties to allow those families space for home working. Tristan stated that many different designs had been considered, and the proposed designs were deemed to have the least impact on the countryside whilst providing space for the attic rooms without losing the attractive curve appeal of the properties, without increasing either the height of the dwellings or the footprint of the properties. Tristan felt the addition of the attics would allow for future families to work from home when required, which could also result in less vehicle movements to and from the properties. Tristan added that the additional floor space would attract an approximate £100,000 in additional CIL contributions to the Council.

Stuart Munro, Ward Member, spoke in objection of the application. Stuart stated that he understood the need for home working space, however the proposed dwellings would be very large via their existing and approved plans. Stuart added that the site had a long and complex planning history, and in his opinion it had reached the point where the proposals were no longer in keeping with the character of the area.

Stephen Conway stated that he fully understood the concerns of the Parish Council and local residents, however the principle of development had been established through previous planning permissions. Stephen commented that it was regrettable that there would be no housing mix on the site, other than four large houses and one very large house. Stephen sought additional details with regards to any potential issues relating to overlooking. Senjuti Manna, case officer, stated that the distance between the old cottage and plot one was approximately 80 metres, which was significantly more than was recommended within the Borough Design Guide, whilst trees would also provide additional screening. Senjuti added that it was accepted that this was a rural setting, however the proposals allowed for more than double the recommended separation distance.

Lisa Burns-Peake commented that plot one would be located directly behind her home and would be an invasion of their privacy with direct views into their garden and bedroom.

Angus Ross stated that the site had a long and complex planning history. Angus stated that the question for the Committee was whether it was reasonable to refuse this application when there was no proposed increase in ridge height or footprint, and sought officer comment on the viability of such a refusal should it go to appeal. Marcia Head, Head of Development Management, stated that the proposed changes were the inclusion of dormers and roof light windows, with no increase to the ridge height or footprint of any of the properties. Marcia confirmed that the separation distances were double that of the recommended distances.

Gary Cowan felt that the changes to the existing planning permission were minor, and Wokingham Borough Council would likely not fare well at an appeal. Gary commented that the site was 2.32 hectares, and in another location up to 70 houses could be placed on such a site.

RESOLVED That application number 213380 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 86 to 91.