West Berkshire Council

Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Council Chamber Council Offices Market Street Newbury. View directions

Contact: Jenny Legge 

Note: This meeting will be streamed live here: https://www.westberks.gov.uk/westernareaplanninglive 

Media

Items
No. Item

7.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 341 KB

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 9 June 2021. Minutes for the meeting held on 30 June 2021 will be available for the next meeting of the Western Area Planning Committee.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2021 were available for this meeting, however the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 June 2021 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of the following amendments:

Item 2, page 17, paragraph 2: removal of duplicate text.

Item 3, page 20, paragraph 13: “would have a precedent”, should read “would have set a precedent”.

8.

Election of Vice Chairman

Minutes:

Councillor Tony Vickers noted, as per paragraph 4.6.7 of the Council’s Constitution, that as there was no Chairman present and the Vice-Chairman was acting as Chairman, the Committee must elect a Vice-Chairman for the meeting and he invited nominations.

Councillor Howard Woollaston nominated Councillor Hilary Cole. This proposal was seconded by Councillor Jeff Cant. At the vote the motion was carried.

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 Adrian Abbs, Phil Barnett, Jeff Cant, Hilary Cole, Carolyne Culver, Lynne Doherty, Tony Vickers and Howard Woollaston declared an interest in Agenda Item 4.1, 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.

Councillor Lynne Doherty 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.

Councillors Adrian Abbs, Phil Barnett, Tony Vickers and Howard Woollaston declared an interest in Agenda Item 4.3, 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. and Parish: 20/02402/REG3, Newbury Football Club, Faraday Road, Newbury pdf icon PDF 361 KB

Proposal:

Creation of open space for public recreation including demolition of former football ground clubhouse; delivery of new parking spaces and erection of timber bollards and new fencing generally.

Location:

Newbury Football Club, Faraday Road, Newbury, RG14 2AD.

Applicant:

West Berkshire Council

Recommendation:

To DELEGATE to the Head of Development and Planning to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the schedule of conditions (Section 8.2 of the report)

 

AND

 

Subject to a referral to the National Planning Casework Unit as the Local Planning Authority is minded to grant planning permission for an application on land owned by the Council, despite receiving an objection from Sport England.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillors Hilary Cole, Lynne Doherty and Howard Woollaston declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(1) by virtue of the fact that they were members of the Executive. As their interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, they determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

(Councillors Phil Barnett and Tony Vickers declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4(1) by virtue of the fact that they were members of Newbury Town Council’s Planning and Highways Committee where this item had been considered. As their interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, they determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

(Councillor Jeff Cant declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4(1) by virtue of the fact that he was a Ward Member for this application. 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.

(Councillors Adrian Abbs and Carolyne Culver declared that they had been lobbied on Agenda Item 4(1).)

1.     The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 20/02402/REG3 in respect of Newbury Football Club, Faraday Road, Newbury, RG14 2AD. Approval was sought for the creation of open space for public recreation including demolition of former football ground clubhouse; delivery of new parking spaces and erection of timber bollards and new fencing generally.

2.     Mr Masie Masiiwa (Senior Planning Officer) introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

3.     The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard, Team Leader (Highways Development Control), if he had any observations relating to the application. Mr Goddard indicated that the application followed previous applications which had been looked at extensively with regard to highways, particularly parking accumulation. With the planning applications that had been submitted in 2018, extensive surveys had been undertaken with regard to the use of the car park and the results concluded that with mainly off-peak use, there would be sufficient car parking available. On that basis, there was no objection on traffic grounds because any traffic generation was mainly off-peak. There was an existing car park on the site which was being re-vitalised and there was no objection from Highways to this proposal.

4.     Councillor Phil Barnett noted that no Town Council representative was due to speak to the item, but this was because the Officer who should have given notification by 4.00pm on the day before the meeting, was on annual leave. Councillor Barnett felt this put Members in a difficult position and said that even at the site meeting, discussion had taken place about  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.(1)

10.(2)

Application No. and Parish: 21/00429/HOUSE, White Lodge, Donnington Grove, Shaw Cum Donnington pdf icon PDF 428 KB

Proposal:

Two storey rear extension and external alterations to existing dwelling, following demolition of existing outbuildings (resubmission of application 20/01193/HOUSE).

Location:

White Lodge, Donnington Grove.

Applicant:

Mr and Mrs Baynham

Recommendation:

To delegate to the Head of Development and Planning to REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION for the reasons listed in Section 8.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillor Lynne Doherty declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(2) by virtue of the fact that she was a ward member for this 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.)

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 21/00429/HOUSE in respect of White Lodge, Donnington Grove, Shaw-cum Donnington. Approval was sought for a two storey rear extension and external alterations to existing dwelling, following demolition of existing outbuildings (resubmission of application 20/01193/HOUSE).

2.      Mr Simon Till, Team Leader (Western Area Planning) introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion, the report detailed that the proposal was unsatisfactory in planning terms and officers recommended that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons listed in the main and update reports.

3.      The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard, Team Leader (Highways Development Control), if he had any observations relating to the application. Mr Goddard confirmed that Highways Officers had no objections – access and car parking were not affected and a proposed gate would replace one that was already there.

4.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Callan Powers, agent,  and Mr Simon Baynham, applicant, addressed the Committee on this application.

Applicant/Agent Representation

5.      Mr Powers in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·       This application sought planning permission for a two storey extension to an existing house.

·       Policy C6 of the Housing Site Allocations DPD set out a presumption in favour of extensions to existing houses in the countryside.

·       Since the site was last before the Committee, the footprint, width and height of the proposed extension had all been reduced. 

·       The appearance and architectural features of the proposal had also been changed with a more domestic appearance proposed than last time.

·       The revisions had significantly improved the appearance of the extension and a further drop in ridge height of the roof demonstrated the subservience of the proposed extension.

·       The proposal followed an earlier approved scheme for a two storey rear extension in which the ridge line of the extended roof matched the existing house, that scheme had an floor space area of about an additional 104sqm measured externally.

·       The current scheme where the roof ridge dropped below that of the main house extended to 166sqm externally, but factoring in the removal of some small outbuildings offset quite a bit of that increase.

·       Whilst previous approval had lapsed, nothing had changed in terms of the policy position or local circumstances since that approval.

·       The proposal was subservient to the main house and the visibility of the extension from the park would be limited.

·       The extension’s visibility from the rest of the Conservation Area would be very limited – just affecting the public right of way to the east of the house  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.(2)

10.(3)

Application No. and Parish: 21/01038/HOUSE, 1 Croft Road, Newbury, Newbury Wash Common pdf icon PDF 216 KB

Proposal:

Two storey extension to the side and single storey extension to the rear.

Location:

1 Croft Road, Newbury.

Applicant:

Martin Redford

Recommendation:

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

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillor Adrian Abbs declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(3) by virtue of the fact that he was a ward members for this application. 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.)

(Councillor Phil Barnett declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(3) by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Newbury Town Council’s Planning and Highways Committee where this matter had been discussed. 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.)

(Councillor Tony Vickers declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(3) by virtue of the fact that he was a ward members for this application, and he was also a Member of Newbury Town Council’s Planning and Highways Committee where this matter had been discussed. 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.)

(Councillors Tony Vickers and Howard Woollaston declared that they had been lobbied on Agenda Item 4(3).)

1.     The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 21/01038/HOUSE in respect of 1 Croft Road, Newbury. Approval was sought for a two storey extension to the side and single storey extension to the rear.

2.     The Chairman stated that he had been unable to attend the site visits, and a Principal Planning Officer had not been present either. He suggested that the application needed to be viewed from the neighbouring properties; and proposed deferring debate until there was a chance for Members to do so. He indicated that he had told one of the neighbours that this would be allowed, as he had thought that Covid restrictions had lapsed when they had not. The Chairman felt it would be unfair to the neighbours to move to a debate when less than half of Members had visited the site.

3.     Mrs Sharon Armour stated that the Committee must follow the procedure set out in the Constitution. She noted that the Applicant’s Agent was present at the meeting and was entitled to speak to the item.

4.     The Committee discussed whether it was normal procedure for it to be necessary for the property to be viewed from neighbouring gardens. The Chairman confirmed that this had indeed been the case in previous applications, subject to permission being obtained from the neighbours. Councillor Howard Woollaston indicated that he had viewed the property from a neighbouring property and considered it important that the other members of the Committee do the same.

5.     Councillor Hilary Cole felt the proceedings may be one-sided in the absence of objectors. The Chairman indicated that there were two objectors, one of whom could not make the meeting, but the other was joining via Zoom.

6.     Mrs Armour indicated that the Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.(3)

10.(4)

Application No. and Parish: 21/01012/FUL, Kintbury Methodist Church, Inkpen Road, Kintbury pdf icon PDF 62 KB

Proposal:

Change of Use from redundant Methodist Church to residential dwelling (Use Class C3). Proposals will retain the front elevation onto Inkpen Road unchanged, with the introduction of patio doors to the rear elevation in the location of the existing kitchen window. Internally, the works will involve the creation of a living, kitchen dining area, separate living room, 2no. bedrooms and bathroom.

Location:

Kintbury Methodist Church, Inkpen Road, Kintbury, Hungerford, RG17 9TU.

Applicant:

Mr Tim Cork.

Recommendation:

To DELEGATE to the Head of Development & Planning to REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(4)) concerning Planning Application 21/01012/FUL in respect of Kintbury Methodist Church, Inkpen Road, Kintbury, Hungerford, RG17 9TU. Approval was sought for Change of Use from redundant Methodist Church to residential dwelling (Use Class C3). Proposals will retain the front elevation onto Inkpen Road unchanged, with the introduction of patio doors to the rear elevation in the location of the existing kitchen window. Internally, the works will involve the creation of a living, kitchen dining area, separate living room, 2no. bedrooms and bathroom.

2.      Mr Simon Till, Team Leader (Western Area Planning), introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was unsatisfactory in planning terms and officers recommended that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons listed in the main and update reports.

3.      The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard, Team Leader (Highways Development Control), if he had any observations relating to the application. Mr Goddard confirmed that he had no further comments beyond those made in Mr Till’s presentation.

4.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Tim Cork, applicant, addressed the Committee on this application.

Applicant Representation

5.      Mr Cork, in addressing the Committee, raised the following points:

·       The Officer’s report contained inaccuracies which he had previously highlighted, but which had not corrected in the report.

·       His son and his son’s partner, who had lived in the area all her life, intended to make the building their home.

·       They were very enthusiastic about saving the building by creating a home in the village.

·       Planning policy P1 was aimed at ‘new development’ and did not cater for a Change of Use application for an existing building.

·       The Committee report argued that under policy P1 the proposal required two parking spaces, which could only be found on the street. This was not entirely accurate and missed the important point that it did not adequately explain the context.

·       By granting approval to the application, the current D1 Use Class which the building currently enjoyed would be extinguished forever. This currently permitted the building to be used as a place of worship, a teaching establishment, a crèche, day nursery and clinic amongst other uses. All of these uses would have significantly greater car parking and associated traffic movements than the two car parking spaces needed by the change of use to a residential dwelling. The application would result in a net reduction in the current parking demand, not an increase.

·       As part of the application, a parking survey was undertaken in Inkpen Road, Church Road, Station Road and High Street. These areas were visited and photographed at various times of the day, including 10.30pm, during the week and weekend. Photographic evidence showed that at all times visited, two car parking spaces were available within a short walk of the site.

·       In terms of amenity space, the Committee report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.(4)