Agenda item

Proposal:	Demolition of existing B8 (egg distribution warehouse) and five garages, relocation of sewage treatment plant and erection of 4 houses; 2 x semi-detached 2-bed and 2 x semi-detached 3-bed homes with associated garden and parking.
Location:	The Rancher, Manor Farm Lane, Tidmarsh Reading, Berkshire, RG8 8EX
Applicant:	Manor Farm (Tidmarsh) Ltd
Recommendation:	To DELEGATE to the Head of Development and Planning to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the schedule of conditions (section 7.2).

 

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 17/00968/FULD in respect of the demolition of existing b8 (egg distribution warehouse) and five garages, relocation of sewage treatment plant and erection of 4 houses; 2 x semi- detached 2-bed and 2 x semi-detached 3-bed homes with associated garden and parking.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Colin Pawson, Parish Council representative, Mr James Hanley, Mr Alan Maskell, Ms Denise Preston and Ms Julie Broun, objectors, and Mr Chris Keen, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Pawson in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He thanked the Committee for the opportunity to discuss the application and he recognised that residents opposed the proposed development.

·         The reasons for objection related to matters around loss of privacy, poor design and more. He considered that the conditions, contained within the Officer’s report, were sufficient to address those concerns and therefore, the Parish Council accepted the application – in principle.

Councillor Graham Bridgman noted that concerns had been raised during the site visit regarding access to the site. Mr Pawson explained that one of their concerns related to the turning space for emergency or maintenance vehicles but he was satisfied that this had now been addressed. He also noted that concerns had been raised about increased traffic but he did not consider this to be a significant issue specifically relating to this development.

Mr Hanley in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He lived at the Lawrence Bungalow and required adequate access to the back garden to support his gardening business. He considered that concerns around access had been resolved, in principle, but he wanted to see that this was conditioned within the application to ensure a solution was delivered – if the application was approved.

·         He was concerned about access to the sewage treatment plant and wanted to see that this was considered fully within the plans.

Ms Broun in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         She lived at number five Manor Farm Lane.

·         There was an issue with regards to flooding in the area and she felt that the development would exacerbate the issue further. It was essential that the application included mitigation measures to ensure flood risk was managed appropriately.

·         Parking was an issue for visitors due to the rural setting and limited parking space. He hoped that the application would also include the provision of 4 parking spaces. 

Ms Preston in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         She lived at number two Manor Farm Lane.

·         She was concerned about the hours of work detailed within the planning application and felt that 10 hours would cause too much disruption and noise. She requested that the working hours should be revised to 08:30.

·         She was concerned that plant material might block access to the site or cause an obstruction. 

Mr Maskell in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He lived at number one Manor Farm Lane.

·         The calculated daily vehicle movement was not accurate and in particular – the 20 ‘other vehicle movements’ in respect of the B8 Egg Packing Distribution Business did not exist. Vehicle movements in respect of the garages were inaccurate because they were seldom used either. Overall – the total number of vehicle movements provided a false and inaccurate picture.

Councillor Bridgman asked Mr Maskell whether he had seen the map provided in the update report which outlined a proposed access route to the sewage treatment plant. Mr Maskell stated that he had not seen the proposal, but that he would be satisfied with any proposed route provided that it was adequate for plant material/ vehicles to use.  

Councillor Richard Crumly asked for clarification regarding the issue of parking in/ around the site. Residents advised that they had, in most cases, converted their front lawn to provide suitable parking spaces and that they lacked official parking spaces for visitors.

Councillor Alan Macro asked whether Mr Hanley had any concerns regarding the proximately of the new development to his home. Mr Hanley stated that he was concerned to a degree but he was not overly worried about the location of the new properties.

Councillor Graham Pask asked whether the ownership of the garages (to be demolished) was known. Ms Broun stated that the residents owned the freehold and that negotiations would ensue to agree transfer of ownership if the application was approved.

Mr Chris Keen in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He had prepared a statement but he wanted to address the points specifically raised at the meeting.

·         He was happy to negotiate relocating access to the back garden at Lawrence Bungalow.

·         Access to the treatment plant had been addressed and a map included in the update report. The route had been in situ for some time and would be suitable for the proposed use – he was happy to include amendments to Rights of Access.

·         Concerns regarding flood risk could be addressed through conditions and he was happy to discuss suitable options.

·         He acknowledged the concerns regarding parking but reminded Members that these were unofficial spaces of which residents were not legally entitled to use but had benefitted from for many years.

·         The traffic report provided by ITraffic was produced based on an assessment of the activity onsite and he believed that it was an accurate reflection of traffic flow. 

In response to questions asked by Members, Mr Keen confirmed that he would accept changes to the conditions associated with working hours and access to Lawrence Bungalow.

Councillor Tim Metcalfe, speaking as Ward Member, in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He considered that the site was ideal for development – brown field, industrial use.

·         Comments had been made regarding ‘overdevelopment’ and the design being ‘out of character’ but he was not convinced that this was the case.

·         He was concerned about the height of the gable end and the impact it would have on the nearby property – Lawrence Bungalow.  The proposed ridge height could cause a degree of overshadowing.

·         The plans seemed to suggest that the new development’s parking space would be positioned in front of the existing properties – this was not suitable or reasonable.

·         The update sheet suggested that there would be a fence introduced around the perimeter of the treatment plant but he was not sure why it was necessary if the treatment plant would remain as part of the field.

Massie Masiiwa was invited to comment on the points raised by Councillor Metcalfe. In response, Masie Masiiwa stated that the applicant was required to submit details regarding the fencing but the information had not yet been received.   David Pearson advised that it was common to see agricultural land sub divided into sections and that the same principle would apply when considering the suitability of the treatment plant fencing within the field.

Masie Masiiwa advised that the proposed development would be set back from the current position of the outbuilding and therefore the impact from the gable ends had been assessed accordingly and considered acceptable. 

Councillor Bridgman suggested that the plan detailed two more gables which were higher than those used for comparison to neighbouring properties. He suggested that the impact had been assessed based on the incorrect gable line.

In response to concerns raised by Members, Gareth Dowding advised that there would be sufficient turning space for larger vehicles – this included a calculation based on the introduction of a bin store at the entrance of the site.

Councillor Crumly asked what the process would be in terms of pending cases referred to in point 5.9 of the Officer’s report. David Pearson advised that, if the LA was minded to refuse those applications, then the applicant would have a right to appeal the decision. Equally, the LA could take appropriate action if they had reason to believe that permissions were contravened.

Councillor Alan Macro highlighted that the impact assessment had been made based on the south ridge from the proposed development and he considered that the east ridge could impact the Lawrence Bungalow also. Therefore, he was keen to see that Permitted Development Rights were introduced on both the south and east side of the new development. Masie Masiiwa advised that it was possible to add to the current condition as requested.

Councillor Webster acknowledged that the agent had introduced changes to minimise the impact and felt that he should be commended for doing so. Furthermore, the agent had accepted additional changes to the conditions to reassure local residents and manage the impact accordingly. Therefore, Councillor Webster proposal acceptance of Officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Bridgman.

Councillor Keith Chopping stated that he found no issue with the ridge height of the gable ends but he was concerned about access to the treatment plant and wanted to see that it was adequately addressed. He supported the application and requested that the condition relating to working hours was amended if the application was approved.

Councillor Law suggested that the application could be considered as overdevelopment. He noted the response provided in respect of access to the treatment plant and suggested that access should be conditioned. David Person advised that, due to the outline of the development site, a condition could be included.

Councillor Crumly considered that issues surrounding the Certificate of Lawfulness resulted in numerous uncertainties and for that reason he could not support the application.

Councillor Pamela Bale stated that she was concerned about the impact the development would have on parking in / around the area.

Councillor Marigold Jaques believed that the conditions helped to minimise the impact upon neighbouring properties but that these might not be adhered too. She felt that Members had a duty of care to consider and for that reason she could not support the application.

In considering the above application Members voted in favour of the proposal to accept Officers recommendation to grant planning permission subject to amended conditions.

RESOLVED that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

 

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

 

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the application form, the design and access statement, the amended transport statement, the amended location plan, and the following approved drawings:

 

a) Proposed site plan drawing No PL-05 received on 12 April 2017

b) Amended proposed plans drawing No PL-07C received on 28 July 2017

c) Amended proposed elevations drawing No PL-08 C received on 28 July 2017

d) Amended proposed section through site drawing No PL-10B received on 22 June 2017

e) Amended existing and proposed block plan drawing No PL-03B received on 22 June 2017

f) Visibility splays drawing No TB12502-GA-005 received on 09 June 2017.

g) Proposed swept path analysis - fire tender and large panel van drawing No

TB12502-GA-001 received on 09 June 2017.

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

 

3. No development shall take place until samples, and an accompanying schedule, of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwellings and hard surfaced areas hereby permitted, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Samples of the materials shall be made available for inspection on request. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials.

 

Reason: To ensure that the external materials are visually attractive and respond to local character. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy

Framework (March 2012), the National Planning Practice Guidance (March 2014), PoliciesADPP5, CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and the Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

 

4. No development shall take place until details, to include a plan, indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected around the dwellings and the sewage treatment plant have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment plan for the sewage treatment plant shall include the proposed access gate into the enclosure. The boundary treatment shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme before the dwellings hereby permitted are occupied or in accordance with a timetable to be submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority as part of the details submitted for this condition. The approved boundary treatments shall thereafter be retained.

 

Reason: The boundary treatment is an essential element in the detailed design of this development and the application is not accompanied by sufficient details to enable the Local Planning Authority to give proper consideration to these matters. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and the Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

 

5. Should any unforeseen contamination be encountered during the development, the developer shall inform the Local Planning Authority immediately. Any subsequent investigation/remedial/protective works deemed necessary by the Local Planning Authority shall be carried out to agreed timescales and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. If no contamination is encountered during the development, a letter confirming this fact shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority upon completion of the development.

 

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of proposed occupants of the application site. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policy OVS5 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan (1991-2006) Saved Policies 2007.

 

7. The hours of work for all contractors for the duration of the site development shall unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing be limited to:

 

8:30am to 6:00pm Mondays to Fridays;

8:30am to 1:00pm Saturdays;

nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining land users and occupiers. This is in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policies OVS5 and OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 Saved Policies 2007

 

8. The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until the refuse and recycling facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved details. The refuse and recycling facilities shall be retained for this purpose thereafter.

 

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate and safe refuse/recycling facilities within the site. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012),

Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berk shire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and the Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

 

9. No development (including site clearance and any other preparatory works) shall commence on site until a scheme for the protection of trees to be retained is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall include a plan showing the location of the protective fencing, and shall specify the type of protective fencing. All such fencing shall be erected prior to any development works taking place and at least 2 working days notice shall be given to the Local Planning Authority that it has been erected. It shall be maintained and retained for the full duration of works or until such time as agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. No activities or storage of materials whatsoever shall take place within the protected areas without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

 

Note: The protective fencing should be as specified at Chapter 6 and detailed in figure 2 of B.S.5837:2012.

 

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features during the construction phase in accordance with the objectives of the NPPF and Policies CS14, CS18 and CS19 of West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026

 

10. No development shall take place until a scheme of surface water drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall incorporate sustainable drainage principles to deal with surface water run-off from the roof of the dwellings and within the application site. The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be first occupied until the scheme of surface water drainage has been implemented in accordance with the approved details. The approved method of surface water drainage shall be retained and maintained thereafter.

 

Reason: To ensure that surface water will be managed in a sustainable manner. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012),

Policy CS16 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design - Part 4 Sustainable Design Techniques (June 2006).

 

11. No development (including site clearance and any other preparatory works) shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The statement shall provide for:

 

a) The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors

b) Loading and unloading of plant and materials

c) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development

d) The erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing

e) Wheel washing facilities

f) Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction

g) A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works

h) A scheme given full details of how any spoil or debris arising from the proposed development will be disposed of.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining land uses and occupiers and in the interests of highway safety. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy

Framework (March 2012), Policies CS5 and CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy

(2006-2026) and Policy TRANS 1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

 

12. No dwelling shall be occupied until the vehicle parking and turning space have been surfaced, marked out and provided in accordance with the approved plans. The parking and turning space shall thereafter be kept available for parking (of private motor cars and/or light goods vehicles) at all times.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is provided with adequate parking facilities, in order to reduce the likelihood of roadside parking that would adversely affect road safety and the flow of traffic. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007) and Policy P1 of then Housing Site Allocation DPD.

 

13. No dwelling shall be occupied until the cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved drawings and this area shall thereafter be kept available for the parking of cycles at all times.

 

Reason: To ensure the development reduces reliance on private motor vehicles and assists with the parking, storage and security of cycles. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007) and Policy P1 of the Housing Site Allocation DPD.

 

14. The windows at first floor level, including roof lights in the northern elevations on all four dwellings shall be top hung and fitted with obscure glass before the dwellings hereby permitted are occupied. The obscure glazing shall be permanently retained in that condition thereafter.

 

Reason: In the interests of the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties and to prevent the overlooking of adjacent properties in the interests of neighbouring amenity. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (2006) and Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/2 House Extensions (July

2004).

 

15. No development shall take place until a footpath signpost at the junction with the A340 has been installed in an appropriate location agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The message details and location of the sign and signpost shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and shown on a plan prior to any development commencing. The approved sign and signpost shall be retained thereafter as part of the proposed development.

 

Reason: To reinforce the existence of Manor Farm Lane as a designated footpath, to warn vehicles entering the site and to maintain the safety between vehicles and pedestrians. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), and Policies CS 13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy.

 

16. Irrespective of the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, the car ports approved on the site shall not be used for any purpose other than as parking spaces for the dwellings, unless permission has been granted by the Local Planning Authority as a result of an application being submitted for that purpose.

 

Reason: To ensure that the car ports are kept available for vehicle parking in the interest of road safety. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy

Framework (March 2012), Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy

(2006-2026), Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved

Policies 2007) and Policy P1 of the Housing Site Allocation DPD.

 

17. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking, re -enacting or modifying that Order), no extensions, alterations, buildings or other development which would otherwise be permitted by Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C and E of that Order shall be carried out, without planning permission being granted by the Local Planning Authority in respect of an application made for that purpose.

 

Reason: To prevent the overdevelopment of the site, given the limited amenity space, and in the interests of respecting the character and appearance of the surrounding area. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies ADPP5, CS14, CS18 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

 

18. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order), no windows including dormer windows and roof lights (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) which would otherwise be permitted by Schedule 2, Part 1, of that Order shall be constructed at first floor level or the roof slope on the northern and eastern elevations of the dwellings hereby permitted, without planning permission being granted by the Local Planning Authority in respect of an application made for that purpose.

 

Reason: In the interests of the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties and to prevent the overlooking of adjacent properties in the interests of neighbouring amenity. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (2006) and Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/2 House Extensions (July

2004).

 

19. No development shall take place until details of the vehicle access route for the maintenance of the sewage treatment plant have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall show how the route will be accessed, maintained and kept available for use at all times. Thereafter the access route shall be kept available for access to the sewage treatment plant and maintained and kept available for use at all time in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is provided with adequate access for the maintenance of the sewage treatment plant. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).