Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 28^th November 2018.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 28^th November 2018 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

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.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 17/00186/COMIND in respect of the conversion and refurbishment of existing listed residential building into a 53 bedroom boutique hotel and private members club including Coach House extension, detached spa facility with outdoor swimming pool and enabling development in the form of 6 detached lodge units and 2 x 4 bedroom family houses, was deferred for consideration at a later Committee meeting.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 18/02512/HOUSE in respect of a two-bay garage to front of property (Section 73 application to vary Condition 1 of Planning Permission 17/01646/HOUSE).

David Pearson introduced the report to Members’ of the Committee, which recommended conditional approval, and ran through the key points. He referred to the update sheet and stated that there was an error under section two. It stated that the existing house had four bedrooms and with the approved extensions this would reduce to three bedrooms. David Pearson clarified that the existing house had four bedrooms and with the approved extensions this would increase to five bedrooms.

David Pearson also drew Members attention to section three on the update sheet, which answered questions that had been raised by Members at the site visit regarding solar panels. It confirmed that there could be solar panels placed on the roof subject to compliance with the requirements of permitted development rights under the General Permitted Development Order.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Andrew House, Parish Council representative, Mr Chris Marsh, agent, and Councillor Quentin Webb, Ward Member, addressed the Committee on this application.

Parish Council Representation

Mr House in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    He was the Chairman of Bradfield Parish Council and was representing the views of the Parish Council, which objected to the planning application.

·                    The site was located within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Other properties nearby were served by good road frontages.

·                    There had been numerous planning applications submitted for the site dating back to 2015. The planning application being considered currently was the seventh planning application. The planning application submitted in 2015 had included a proposal to convert the upstairs area within the garage to a family room.

·                    The Parish Council had objected to a proposal for a two storey building that included a three bay garage as it would face the road and was located within the countryside. The Parish Council had objected to that previous application due to the impact that would be caused. A revised application had then been submitted which reduced the size of the loft area. This had also been refused and therefore a new proposal was submitted that reduced the ridge height of the building down to 3.9 metres.

·                    It had been proposed that the garage area would need to allow room for two four by four vehicles however, the current car port would not allow for this. A partition had also been erected, which would inhibit use as a garage for car storage.

·                    The Parish Council felt that the application posed a risk and that West Berkshire Council needed to consider refusing retrospective planning permission for the site.

·                    The Parish Council felt challenged by the application as in essence a garage was being changed into accommodation.

·                    Mr House was sceptical as to whether there had ever been any intention to use the building as a garage. It was felt that any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.(2)