Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 7 December 2016.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 7 December 2016 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendments:

Item 65 – Declarations of Interest, final paragraph:

Councillor Emma Webster commented that in relation to Agenda Item 4(2), she would be considering the matter with a fair and open mind, regardless of the debate held and decision taken on this item at the Eastern Area Planning Committee held on 24 August 2016. It was agreed that this applied to all Members of the Committee.

Item 66(1) – 16/02273/FULD – Green Gables, Tidmarsh Lane, Tidmarsh – penultimate paragraph, final sentence:

It would not therefore conform with the requirements of the NPPF.

Item 66(2) – 16/02600/FULEXT – Fairwinds, The Street, Mortimer Common – third declaration of interest paragraph (as declaration of interest paragraph above):

(Councillor Emma Webster commented that in relation to Agenda Item 4(2), she would be considering the matter with a fair and open mind, regardless of the debate held and decision taken on this item at the Eastern Area Planning Committee held on 24 August 2016. It was agreed that this applied to all Members of the Committee.)

Item 66(2) – 16/02600/FULEXT – Fairwinds, The Street, Mortimer Common – fourth paragraph, first sentence:

In terms of the appeal decision referred to, Councillor Bridgman pointed out that the Planning Committee, when it considered the Crookham House application, had accepted the Officer view that affordable housing could not be insisted upon.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Emma Webster declared an interest in Agenda Item 4(3), but reported that, as her interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, she determined to remain to take part in the debate.

Agenda Item 4(1) concerning Planning Application 16/02724/MINMAJ – an application for a change of use to amend approved details to enable receipt of non-recyclable waste at the Household Waste Recycling Facility was deferred post publication of the agenda. This was to allow further time to consider the issues raised in a lengthy letter of objection, received from an interested party post publication of the agenda, and the application would return to Committee at a later date, most likely the next Committee meeting scheduled for 8 February 2017.

Agenda Item 4(2) concerning Planning Application 16/02725/MINMAJ – an application for variation of condition (7) (hours of operation of planning permission 14/01111/MINMAJ) was deferred post publication of the agenda. This was to allow further time to consider the issues raised in a lengthy letter of objection, received from an interested party post publication of the agenda, and the application would return to Committee at a later date, most likely the next Committee meeting scheduled for 8 February 2017.

(Councillor Emma Webster declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(3) by virtue of the fact that her employer was a retirement and care home developer (extra care units). She did not however work for the extra care provider associated with this application, but wanted to raise this for clarification purposes. As her interest was personal and not an other registrable or a disclosable pecuniary interest, she determined to remain to take part in the debate.)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 15/02842/OUTMAJ in respect of an outline application for a residential development of up to 325 houses and apartments (including 70 extra care units) with associated access, parking, amenity space and landscaping. All matters reserved.

Prior to the Planning Officer’s introduction to the report, Councillor Graham Pask made reference to the need for Members to follow the speaking rights procedure outlined in the Council’s Constitution. This required the Committee to move directly to representations from Parishes, members of the public etc following the Planning Officer’s introduction. Questions to Officers needed to be held until all presentations had completed.

Bob Dray, Planning Officer, then introduced the report and highlighted the following points:

·         This was a reserved matters application which required a decision from the Committee on the representations to be made at the planning appeal for this application and not to determine the application.

·         The appeal had been lodged by the applicant on the grounds of non-determination of the planning application.

·         The site would sit within the revised settlement boundary outlined in the Housing Site Allocations Development Plan Document (HSA DPD).

·         An affordable housing provision of 8.3% of the dwellings had been negotiated and this equated to 27 affordable units. This was satisfactory to the Council’s independent viability consultants. While this percentage fell short of the Council’s policy requirements, Planning Officers were also seeking a financial contribution to mitigate the impact of the development on education provision, as the development would require an extension to the new Theale Primary School. There was scope on the new school site to accommodate this extension.

·         Officers’ recommendation was to make representations at the appeal that planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions and planning obligations outlined in the report. These would form the Heads of Terms for the planning obligation.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr David Wood, Parish Council representative, and Mr Malcolm McPhail, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Wood in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    Theale Parish Council objected to this proposed huge development. It would increase the population of Theale by around 30%, change the character of the village and have a negative impact on local infrastructure, i.e. add pressure on the GP surgery.

·                    There were issues with the current sewer system and this would be exacerbated by this development.

·                    The proposed height of the extra care accommodation was concerning, particularly for an area that was adjacent to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

·                    Local roads  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.(3)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(4)) concerning Planning Application 16/01846/OUTMAJ in respect of a residential development comprising the erection of 25 dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping works. Matters to be considered: Access.

Bob Dray, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that as with the previous agenda item, this application required a decision from the Committee on the representations to be made at the planning appeal for this application and not to determine the application. The appeal had been lodged by the applicant on the grounds of non-determination of the planning application.

The Planning Officer went on to explain that the proposed affordable housing provision on this site was in accordance with the Council’s Core Strategy Policy CS6, with 40% of all dwellings on site being socially rented affordable housing. This equated to ten units.

Officers’ recommendation was that representations should be made at appeal that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions and planning obligations.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr David Wood, Parish Council representative, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Wood in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    Theale Parish Council objected to this application. He questioned this proposal for 25 dwellings as this exceeded the planning policy allocation of 15 dwellings, and an extant permission was already in place for seven dwellings.

·                    Access to the anglers’ car park was another cause for concern. This was also used by pedestrians and it was an unsuitable road for increased traffic.

·                    Approval of the application would have a negative impact on local amenities, i.e. put additional pressure on the GP surgery.

·                    The site should be retained as green space.

·                    The lake was a safety concern that needed to be highlighted.

Mr Malcolm McPhail, applicant/agent, while not listed to speak, requested to do so. He stated that he had made this request within the required timeframe. However, Officers had no record of this at the meeting.

Councillor Graham Bridgman proposed suspension of standing orders to allow Mr McPhail to address the Committee. This was seconded by Councillor Emma Webster.

Members voted in favour of suspending standing orders.

Mr McPhail in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                     In reference to the comments made by the Parish Council, North Lakeside was, at an earlier stage, to be retained as a landscape buffer but this legal requirement had been removed. This was a relatively small area and the potential for a landscape buffer was limited. Open space requirements formed part of the larger 325 dwelling development.

·                     No policy objections had been raised to residential development in the Planning Officer’s report. No highway objections had been raised.

·                     An extant permission was also in place for this site, but this would be replaced by this planning application (if approved) alongside the 325 dwelling development.

·                     Mr McPhail made it clear that it was the intention, post obtaining planning consent, to sell the site to a third party developer.

·                     As stated in the report, education mitigation for this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.(4)

A date of 1 February 2017 at 9.30am was agreed for site visits if necessary. This was in advance of the next Eastern Area Planning Committee scheduled for 8 February 2017.

The Chairman and Vice-Chairman gave their apologies for both the site visit and the Committee meeting. Councillor Alan Law was nominated to chair the site visit.

The appointment of Chairman for the Committee meeting itself would be the first item of business on the agenda.