Agenda item

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of 42 residential apartments in three blocks, including on-site parking, shared amenity spaces, enhanced green spaces to support biodiversity and waste storage facilities. Access for neighbouring garages to be provided by 3.7m wide through-route north of the site. Following demolition of the existing buildings.

Applicant: Burlington Developments

The Committee considered a report on this application, set out in agenda pages 17 to 122.

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

·         Parking Provision and Capacity.

·         HGV Access.

·         Clarification regarding Financial Contributions.

All members except Councillors Soane and Shepherd-Dubey had attended a site visit.

Keith Malvern, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. He referred to the lack of affordable housing as a major reason for objecting. He cited Homes England Fact sheet 9 that stated that affordable housing was key for the housing crisis, ending homelessness as well as helping people get onto the property ladder.  He felt that the application ignored these points. Keith Malvern felt that a deferred payment for affordable housing at a late stage was insufficient

Grant Leggett, Agent, spoke in favour of the application. He mentioned that the officer’s report had more than covered the reasons for the deferral and the site visit. He felt that the pictures the officer had shown in the presentation gave context to the scale of the development. He also referred to an objection from the Nisa Local near to the development.  This had now been withdrawn. He summarised that the development provided delivery of housing on a highly sustainable brownfield site, replacing some tired buildings with a high-quality building, improvements to highway conditions, enhanced landscaping, and biodiversity as well as economic benefits like job creation.

Councillor Firmager asked about parking arrangements on the site and commented that there would be more people wanting to park than there were spaces. He asked officers for more detail on parking. Benjamin Hindle, case officer, indicated that a Parking Management Plan had been conditioned and that it would be strictly enforced, he added that if anyone was to be parked on the site that should not be, they would receive a ticket. The 7 car free units proposed, would have this detailed within their lease. He referred to data in the Supplementary Agenda which indicated that one fifth of parking spaces were available at council run car parks in Wokingham during peak times and that this would provide adequate parking for visitors, however, stated this was for information only and was not required to make the application acceptable in planning terms as Town Centre parking standards had been met.Councillor Firmager added the issue of vans parking for deliveries and asked where they would park safely and without blocking roads. The case officer stated that there should be no issue if they were only there for a short amount of time and added that it would be the same issue in a single access cul-de-sac.

Councillor Shepherd-Dubey asked about the biodiversity of the site and how much there would be in comparison to other places. The case officer referred to the current site as a concrete jungle with very little vegetation on site. The applicant would provide semi-natural green space on the site with the retention of the TPO to the south of the site and amenity and green space to the north. Eco mosaic roofs would also be provided. Councillor Sheperd-Dubey asked about the animal wildlife on site and was informed that measures would be taken to protect bats on site. Greater opportunities would be provided for wildlife to thrive.

Councillor Smith commented that the site was a brownfield site and was where Wokingham Borough Council should be building. He added that the current site was a mess, and that the proposal would tidy it up.

Councillor Cornish mentioned that his previous issue with the application had related to the access for deliveries to the local shop and that the site visit had helped assuage those concerns. He was of the view that is the application was a very good example of a great brownfield development in a very sustainable location and that he fully supported the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Smith and seconded by Councillor Neal that the application be approved.

RESOLVED: That Application 223691 be approved subject to the

a) completion of a legal agreement (S106) to secure the following head of terms-

- My Journey or

- Travel Plan

- Car club contribution

- Details of estate roads

- Employment Skills Plan

- Late-stage affordable housing deferred payment mechanism.

b) Subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in pages 66 to 77 of the agenda

c) Alternative recommendation: That the committee authorise the Head of Development Management to refuse planning permission in the event of an S106 agreement not being completed to secure appropriate contributions within six months of the date of the committee resolution (unless a longer period is agreed by the Head of Development Management in consultation with the Chairman of Planning Committee).