Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Proposal: Application for the approval of Reserved Matters pursuant to Outline planning consent 163547 for the erection of 140 residential dwellings (Use Class C3), associated amenity spaces, play area, access, garages, parking, internal roads, pathways, drainage and associated landscaping (Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale to be considered).

Applicant: Vistry Partnerships (Thames Valley)

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 13 to 46.

Whilst there were no updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda, the Committee were informed verbally by the case officer that informative 10 was no longer required as it was covered by informative 6.

Nina Lloyd, agent, spoke in support of the application. Nina stated that she was delighted with the officer recommendation for approval, and thanked all involved for their efforts and collaborative working. Nina added that the principle of development was established in 2021, and the application had received no technical objections from Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) officers or statutory consultees. Nina stated that the scheme was policy compliant, and would deliver 140 high quality houses which reflected the existing local character. 40 percent (56 houses) of houses delivered on site would be affordable and tenure blind, whilst a 2.8 hectare SANG had been approved and would connect to an existing SANG. Top quality walking and cycling routes would be installed across the development, in addition to community green space with local and native species. The existing perimeter landscape would be maintained, and the site was considered to be located in an extremely sustainable location. Nina supported the officer recommendation of approval, and hoped that the Committee would grant planning permission.

John Kaiser stated that the strategic market assessment indicated that 22 percent of all homes should be four-bedroom, whereas this development proposed 35 percent. John added that there was a housing crisis within the Borough in relation to small and affordable homes, and questioned why four-bedroom homes were being overdelivered with recent planning applications. Sophie Morris, case officer, stated that the dwelling mix had been considered against the 2020 housing needs assessment, and fell comfortably within the specifications and was therefore considered acceptable. Sophie added that it was not considered suitable for 1- and 2-bedroom flats to be delivered in this edge of settlement location, whilst apartment blocks would be delivered in other locations within the Arborfield SDL. John Kaiser stated that members needed to see the running total of homes delivered within the SDL locations, including dwelling mix and affordable homes. John stressed that the borough needed more smaller homes and not 4-bedroom houses.

John Kaiser stated that this development was presented as part of the wider SDL, and queried how this could be justified with no highway link to the wider SDL. Connor Corrigan, Service Manager – Planning and Delivery, stated that a highways link could not be provided due to the positioning of the school and leisure centre pitches. Connor added that a link was available at the top of the Hogwood spur and onto the Nine Mile Ride extension, providing easy access for pedestrians and cyclists to the district centre. Connor stated that there was no physical ability to link the two, and the site was no different to the sites in the norther part of the SDL

John Kaiser queried whether S106 charges for buses were being reflected in the increasing costs being sought by bus operators. Connor Corrigan stated that officers were in consultation with bus companies, and this was generally reflected within S106 contributions.

David Cornish felt that the best possible use of land should be sought, as residents would likely prefer more dwelling density at edge of settlement locations rather than having to give up more green space in other areas. David added that small homes had long been part of the rural landscape, and queried whether all pathways within the site were open to cyclists and horse riders. Sophie Morris stated the Arborfield SDL supplementary planning document gave a broad density range of up to 35 dwellings per hectare. Due to the location and edge of settlement status, the proposed 27.5 dwellings per hectare was considered acceptable. Sophie stated that the paths around the perimeter of the site were 2m wide and were open to cyclists, whilst the pedestrian cycle path secured by S106 would provide a route up to Biggs Lane. Connor Corrigan confirmed that horses would not be permitted in the SANG, as Natural England did not want the conflict between horses and dogs.

Stephen Conway stated that the scope of member deliberations were limited as this was a reserved matters application. Stephen was of the opinion that the design of the dwellings was attractive and of high quality, and he was very pleased to see 40 percent affordable homes, with 70 percent of those being social rent whilst being of high-quality design and tenure blind.

Andrew Mickleburgh was pleased that many issues raised at the outline stage had been addressed, particularly noise and odour concerns which had resulted in positive assessments being carried out. Andrew added that he was pleased with the overall designs being proposed, and with the proposed levels of tenure blind affordable housing.

Andrew Mickleburgh proposed that the application be proposed as per the officer recommendation, minus informative 10 as advised by the case officer. This was seconded by Stephen Conway.

RESOLVED That application number 220822 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 14 to 17, with the omission of informative 10 as advised by the case officer.