Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 27 January 2021.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 27 January 2021 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.

Councillor Jo Stewart declared an interest in Agenda Item 4(1) 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 and vote on the matter.

(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.)

(Councillor Jo Stewart declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(1) by virtue of the fact that she knew one of the objectors. Councillor Stewart had not been in contact with this person regarding the application and had not predetermined the application. 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.)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 20/02861/FUL in respect of the demolition of a 2 storey side extension and erection of an attached dwelling to form 2 no 3 bed dwellings, with associated access and additional parking, cycle stores and refuse. 

Mr Michael Butler introduced the report and highlighted the key points:

·           Officers were recommending approval of the application and in excess of 10 objections had been received.

·           Mr Butler referred to the update sheet regarding number 18 Sandhills Way and clarified that the floor plans showed six bedrooms rather than four. This was because it was a small House of Multiple Occupancy (HMO). This was considered a permitted development. Officers had taken this point into consideration when considering the parking spaces required.

·           If the application was approved a condition would be included that removed future permitted development rights.

·           Regarding the planning history, in the original outline permission relating to the whole of Fords Farm Estate in 1976, no permitted development rights were removed in relation to hard standing within front gardens. Therefore if the application was refused, the owners of the properties in question could convert to hard standing without liaising with the Planning Authority.

·           There had been 27 contributors to the application, all of which objected to the application. Holybrook Parish Council strongly objected to the application. The West Berkshire Council Highways Department had not raised any objection to the application and considered that sufficient parking was proposed for the site.

·           On balance in terms of character and appearance whilst Officers considered that there would be a degree of harm caused if the application was approved, the harm was not significant enough to merit a recommendation for refusal. Separation distances to other dwellings in the area were considered acceptable and would not have an impact on amenity. Regarding number 16 Sandhill Way, there would be a degree of impact on this property from the additional parking however with proposed additional landscaping, which formed part of conditions for the application, on balance this was deemed acceptable by Officers.

·           Parking was the most contentious element of the application. The parking proposed met the Council’s standards on parking (Policy P1) and this was detailed in section 6.13 of the report.

·           Mr Butler reported that there had been one further objection to the application and this was detailed along with the Officer’s response in the update sheet. The update sheet also contained a further condition recommended by Officers, concerning landscaping.

·           Mr Butler concluded that Officers were making a balanced recommendation for approval of the application. The application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.(1)