Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval.

Proposal: Full application for the proposed alterations to land levels to form orchard with raised vegetable beds.

Applicant: Charles Vickery.

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 49 to 72.

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

·         Confirmation that the Environment Agency had raised no objection to the application subject to proposed conditions and informatives;

·         Additional condition 4 as requested by the Environment Agency;

·         Confirmation that a Construction Environment Management Plan was subject to condition 3 to ensure any impacts upon species is mitigated during the construction phase;

·         Additional comments from local residents and associated officer response;

·         Reference to an email received from the applicant with reference to digging on site occurring in order to satisfy building regulations in relation to the retaining wall, and the soil would be going back once the work was complete.

Liz Connolly, resident, spoke in objection to the application. Liz stated that she spoke on behalf of the eight neighbours who had objected to this application. Liz added that in her opinion approval of this application would mean a substantial increase in flood risk, a change in the historical topography, whilst negatively impacting sewage and water drainage. A very gentle scope towards the Barkham brook had existed within the paddock prior to excavation of materials, and not a steep gradient as referenced within the report. Liz was of the opinion that the impermeable clay-based material was unsuitable to be used for planting without the inclusion of additional topsoil. Liz stated that sewage pipes ran along the paddock and served three neighbouring properties, and Liz felt that the pipes may have already been damaged given the weight of the material and the use of heavy machinery. Liz added that there were covenants in place allowing access for maintenance which the plans had not considered. Liz was of the opinion that the heritage report for the new building application appeared to be ignored, which stated that the Carter’s Hill house was the dominant status dwelling and building which sat proud of the flood plain on a bank above the flood plain. Liz referenced very substantial flooding in recent times which had required emergency evacuation of their horses and severely impacted their business, and was completely at odds with Wokingham borough Council’s (WBC’s) strategic flood assessment report which stated no historical flooding along the Barkham Brook according to Environment Agency records. Liz stated that two properties had also been flooded, and questioned why the report assumes a 1 in 100 year flood risk when she and her neighbours had provided evidence of serious flooding having occurred at least 4 times in the past 25 years. Liz stated that a landfill site upstream of the applicant’s site had increased flood levels significantly, whilst a Category A dam just half a mile to the east of the site could present catastrophic floods. Liz concluded by stating that global warming would only add to the increased flood risk faced by this area, and for those who lived there.

Katie Vickery, applicant, spoke in support of the application. Katie stated that their whole approach to the land was one of sustainability, and creating a house and gardens which recognised the environmental challenges of the future. Katie added that they were keen to support the existing biodiversity, and a 30m native hedgerow had already been planted along the edge of the paddock. The plan was to plant a mixture of fruit trees, wildflower seeds and vegetables on the site, whilst a more level site would enable things such as ladders to assist with fruit picking. Advice had been sought from both a landscape gardener and the Chair of the RHS soft fruit Committee, and their comments had been incorporated into the proposals. A report had been submitted from a flooding and drainage expert, which had been compiled using localised data from the Environment Agency. The report showed that the site fell outside of the area which was at risk of fluvial flooding, whilst the levelling of the site would not affect the flood plain or the manner in which Barkham Brook flooded. With regards to pluvial flooding, the report noted that there were no impermeable surfaces on the site, and the shallower gradient of the terraces compared to the natural slope and the planting of trees would encourage a greater proportion of rainfall to infiltrate the ground rather than running off. Katie added that the report concluded that the overall run-off rates into the Barkham Brook were proposed to reduce as a result of the proposed development. Katie noted that there were no objections from the built heritage officer, and all neighbouring properties had levelled their land to some extent, whilst the garden of Carter’s Hill House had created a levelled area to create a manmade terrace, which featured a manmade slope.

Gary Cowan, Ward Member, spoke in objection to the application. Gary stated that the planning document contained an excellent report covering the failures of Bearwood Lake dam, located 750m away, which the planning report failed to make reference to. The report outlined that the dam fed into Barkham Brook, whilst the planning document mentioned no reference of historic flooding in the area despite numerous photographic examples from residents. Gary added that new sluices had doubled in size to protect the dam, which led directly into Barkham Brook, which doubled the capacity that would flow from the dam where there was an issue. Gary was not convinced that the proposals were compliant with chapter 14 of the NPPF, whilst the recent comments from the Environment Agency with respect to the impact of minimum changes in land levels needed to be noted. Gary stated that the material used would be predominantly clay-based, which was non-porous, whilst Gary felt that the land could be used as it stood for an orchard given Gary’s opinion that it was not sufficiently steep. Gary stated that the impact of these works needed to be factored into development downstream in Barkham Brook, which it had not. Gary felt that if the land remained as was there would be no change to flood risk, whilst the planting of an orchard would be beneficial in flood risk terms on the current land levels. Gary was of the opinion that a condition that prevented level changes would be the best solution for Carter’s Hill House.

Chris Bowring stated that the Committee needed to be mindful to only consider the red line application site. Chris added that the soil to be used was permeable, already existed on the site, and therefore in his opinion could not exacerbate flooding issues. Chris felt that the planting of trees would likely help to slow the flow of surface water. Brian Conlon, Operational Lead – Development Management, confirmed that the soil to be used would be taken from another area of the application site and would be secured via landscaping conditions.

Andrew Mickleburgh sought clarity that only the area within the red line boundary could be considered, and sought additional details regarding photos shown which demonstrated substantial flooding and the context of the 1 in 100 years flood assessment. Brian Conlon stated that this application was essentially looking at an engineering operation which was situated in flood zone 2. Brian added that planting and raised beds did not regularly require planning permission. Brian stated that the pictures shown demonstrated the type of flooding that could occur in a 1 in 100 year flood zone, which meant that in any one year there was a one-percent chance of flooding. The effect of climate change would also mean that flooding could occur more regularly, or be more severe when it occurred.

Boniface Ngu, Principal Flood Risk & Drainage Engineer, stated that the development was situated within flood zone 2, and the area had been assessed as having a 1 in 100-year flood chance, with a fourteen percent allowance for climate change as approved by the Environment Agency. The river Loddon and its tributaries had a 1 in 100-year flood chance. The effect of levelling land would improve pluvial flooding as it would take water additional time to travel, whilst trees would help store additional water. Boniface felt that the overall plan of levelling off the land with soil that was present on site and providing additional planting would improve the overall flooding situation.

Stephen Conway stated that he had sympathy for local residents and the local Ward Member, however unless the Committee had compelling evidence which could counter that of professional experts then they would be compelled to approve the application. Stephen noted that officers had presented the case that the application could in fact improve the flooding situation. Stephen felt that the relationship between the application and the Grade 2 listed building was sustainable.

David Cornish queried whether any damage done to the byway as a result of the construction phase of this application. Brian Conlon stated that any damage would be dealt with as a civil matter, whilst a construction and environmental management plan would require additional details.

RESOLVED That application number 221788 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 50 to 51, and additional condition 4 as set out within the Supplementary Planning Agenda.