To report any issues with the information below please email executivecycle@westberks.gov.uk.

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Calcot Centre, Highview (off Royal Avenue), Calcot. View directions

Contact: Stephen Chard / Charlene Hurd / Jessica Bailiss 

Items
No. Item

8.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 343 KB

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 23rd May 2018.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 23rd May 2018 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendment:

Item 3 Application no. 17/03411/OUTMAJ – page 42, third paragraph: Councillor Alan Macro reported that he had not abstained from voting and had voted in line with the proposal to refuse the application. Officers would check the detail on this point and if clarification could not be reached the comment should be removed. (Post meeting comment: this could not be verified through checking the written version of the minutes and therefore the comment should be removed).

9.

Declarations of Interest

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.

Minutes:

Councillors Graham Pask and Marigold Jaques declared an interest in Agenda Item 4(2), but reported that, as their interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, they determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

10.

Schedule of Planning Applications

(Note: The Chairman, with the consent of the Committee, reserves the right to alter the order of business on this agenda based on public interest and participation in individual applications.)

10.(1)

Application No. & Parish: 17/03489/FUL - Sabre House, Bath Road, Midgham, Reading pdf icon PDF 180 KB

Proposal:

Mixed use of the site for: vehicle sales and leasing (sui generis), vehicle preparation and washing (B1), and MOT and servicing (B2).  Alteration to east elevation to remove roller shutter door and install glazing to provide for vehicle display, internal alterations to workshop layout, visitor reception and WC and replacement windows to office area.  Variation to authorised operating hours (for customers, workshop based operations, and lighting).  Alternative scheme to the development approved under 16/03528/FUL.

 

Location:

Sabre House, Bath Road, Midgham, Reading, Berkshire, RG7 5UU

 

Applicant:

Mr Graham Joyce – Anchor Vans Ltd

 

Recommendation:

To DELEGATE to the Head of Development and Planning to  APPROVE PLANNING PERMISSION subject to conditions

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillor Tony Linden joined the meeting a 6.35pm)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 17/03489/FUL in respect of the mixed use of the site for: vehicle sales and leasing (sui generis), vehicle preparation and washing (B1), and MOT and servicing (B2).  Alteration to east elevation to remove roller shutter door and install glazing to provide for vehicle display, internal alterations to workshop layout, visitor reception and WC and replacement windows to office area.  Variation to authorised operating hours (for customers, workshop based operations, and lighting).  Alternative scheme to the development approved under 16/03528/FUL.

Councillor Graham Pask asked members of the public if anyone intended to record the meeting. If this was the case then those making a representation had the right to refuse to be recorded. It was confirmed by Mr Steve Russell that he would be recording the meeting.

David Pearson introduced the report to Members of the Committee which was recommended for approval and ran through the key points. He highlighted that there was an amendment to Condition 21 set out within the update report. Mr Pearson also suggested that an amendment be made to condition 16 to state that the windows on the southern elevation of the workshop building should be ‘top hung and obscured glazed windows’.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Anthony Fenn, Parish Council representative, Mr Steve Russell, objector, Mr P Felton, supporter and Mr Simon Joyce, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Anthony Fenn in addressing the Committee raised the following points (Mr Fenn confirmed that he was happy to be recorded):

·         At its meeting on the 23rd January 2018, Midgham Parish Council recorded an objection to the application on the grounds that a vehicle showroom was not suitable for the location, which was rural and close to dwellings.

·         The Parish Council strongly objected to any attempt to remove or change previously imposed conditions relating to operating hours, lighting, use of pressure washers and undertaking work outside the building. Conditions were put in place to protect those living near to a site and therefore all conditions should be upheld. 

·         The extra 15 hours of activity per week was excessive and would fail to protect the amenity of the area. Extended hours of lighting would impact upon the neighbouring dwellings and would cause a visual impact on the area.

·         Pressure washers operated at about 85 to 100 decibels, which could damage hearing and would affect the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

·         The Planning Officer’s report had considered the impact from pressures washers to be low however, the Parish Council disagreed with this.

·         Mr Fenn had visited the adjacent properties six times in the last year and on two of these occasions the workshop doors had been left open. The noise had been so loud, no other ambient noise could be heard. When the doors were closed ambient noise could be heard as well as the noise from the A4.

·         Based on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.(1)

11.

Application No. & Parish: 18/00386/HOUSE - Norton Cottage, Tutts Clump, Reading pdf icon PDF 138 KB

Proposal:

Demolition of existing detached garage and construction of ground and first floor side extension, rear single storey extension.

 

Location:

Norton Cottage, Tutts Clump, Reading, Berkshire, RG7 6JY

 

Applicant:

Waveney Thomson

 

Recommendation:

To DELEGATEto the Head of Development and Planning to APPROVE PLANNING PERMISSION for reasons given below (Section 8.1).

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillor Marigold Jaques declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(2) by virtue of the fact that she had once lived in the area and had known some of the residents. As her interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, she determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

(Councillor Graham Pask declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(2) by virtue of the fact that his children had played at one of the properties on the list many years ago. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 18/00386/HOUSE in respect of the demolition of existing detached garage and construction of ground and first floor side extension, rear single storey extension.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mrs Janetta Kennedy and Mr Roderick Grafton, objectors and Ms Waveney Thomson, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Simon Till introduced the report to Members, which was recommended for approval and ran through the key points. He drew attention to an amendment to Condition 2 on the update sheet.

Mrs Kennedy and Mr Grafton in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         Mrs Kennedy introduced her husband Dick Kennedy. Their objection was to the rear single storey extension proposed.

·         They had welcomed the new owners to Norton Cottage after the death of the previous owner. The property had been left to become derelict.

·         Mrs Kennedy and her husband had lived at Rose Cottage for over 40 years. The cottages had originally been erected to house farm workers.

·         When they had bought the middle cottage, it had already had a second storey extension for the bathroom. They had then joined two single storey extensions together to increase the kitchen size. Next they had built a second storey extension above the bathroom in order of moving the bathroom upstairs. Later on they had removed the flat roof.

·         Mrs Kennedy reported that apart from the porch area they had not increased the footprint to the front of the property.

·         Mrs Kennedy was against the single storey rear extension because there would always be the fear that it could be developed into a second storey extension in the future, which would infringe greatly on her property.

·         Mr Roderick lived at number one Mead Cottage. He felt that the proposal would cause overdevelopment of the site as the plot was only designed for three small dwellings.

·         The porch of the proposed extension would be 70% closer to the boundary.

·         The two storey extension would intrude on the privacy of his home, which would be very close to one of his children’s bedrooms. He had noted that obscured glass could be used in the side elevation and he stressed that this should be enforced if the application was approved.

·         He did not accept the conclusions of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

Appeal Decisions relating to Eastern Area Planning pdf icon PDF 35 KB

Purpose: To inform Members of the results of recent appeal decisions relating to the Eastern Area Planning Committee.

Minutes:

Members noted the outcome of appeal decisions relating to the Eastern Area.