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

Agenda item

Application No. & Parish: 17/02446/FULD - Pamber Green, Blandys Lane, Upper Basildon, Reading, Berkshire RG8 8PG

Proposal:

Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 2 new dwellings

Location:

Pamber Green, Blandys Lane, Upper Basildon, Reading, Berkshire RG8 8PG

Applicant:

Bellmore Homes

Recommendation:

To DELEGATE to the Head of Planning and Countryside to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION 

 

 

Minutes:

(Councillor Pamela Bale rejoined the meeting at 740pm)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 17/02446/FULD in respect of the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of two new dwellings.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Paul Smith, objector, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Paul Smith in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    Mr Smith and his wife lived at Hamstead House, which was opposite the application site.

·                    He asked that Members reject the application as it would be detrimental to the rural street scene and the individual homes that surrounded it, which included some thatched properties.

·                    There had been an appeal against a decision taken to refuse development of three dwellings on the Claregate site, which was a site to the south of the Moorings site and this had been allowed on appeal. West Berkshire Council had refused the application on grounds, which were now being given to approve the site at Pamber Green.

·                    Mr Smith was not satisfied with the density of the screening proposed on the eastern edge of the site or alongside the Listed building, Moorings.

·                    The size of the properties was not acceptable. They would be in view from the adjacent road, surrounding dwellings and open fields to the north and west. The dwellings would also be elevated making them more prominent.

·                    Due to the position of plot one on higher ground, landscaping could not be used to soften its impact upon the Moorings. The report stated that adequate would reduce the impact on the setting of the Moorings and this statement in Mr Smiths’ opinion highlighted that there was a problem.

·                    Mr Smith stated that if the application was approved there were four areas he would like to see included:

-       Demolition restrictions

-       The exclusion of bonfires due to risk to close by thatched properties

-       A restriction on the installation of air handling and heat exchange plant

-       Restrictions on hours of work

·                    Mr Smith urged the Committee to refuse planning permission for the reasons outlined above.

Councillor Alan Law asked for clarification on the Claregate case. Mr Smith explained that it had involved a single storey property on the other side of the Moorings at the southern side of the application site being demolished and replaced with three dwellings..  The application was refused and then approved at appeal.

Councillor Richard Crumly referred to Mr Smith’s description of the character of the area including that there were thatched properties. He thought that residents might have been pleased to see the existing bungalow removed as it was not in a very good state. Mr Smith stated that he had no objection to the principle of developing the site. However, it was the design of the proposed dwellings which was a concern. He felt that the dwellings should sit lighter within the site and due to their prominence it would set a poor precedent if the application was approved.

Councillor Keith Chopping noted Mr Smith’s criticism of the site had included the elevation of the properties. However, the elevation of plot two was not that dissimilar to the existing property High Banks. Mr Smith acknowledged that the height was similar and felt that this formed part of the problem as the similarity of the dwellings would suburbanise their setting.

Councillor Alan Law as Ward Member raised the following points:

·                He was disappointed that there had been no representation from the Parish Council especially as it had made a succinct objection to the application.

·                He felt the application to be a quandary and referred to paragraph 6.2.7, which stated that the Planning Officer had considered on balance that the proposed works would have an acceptable level of impact.

·                He concurred with Mr Smith in that he had no issue with the principle of developing the site and he felt that the site was capable of accommodating two large dwellings.

·                The site visit had been particularly helpful as it had highlighted the elevation issue. He felt that due to the proposed height of the dwellings the impact would be suburbanising.

·                Due to the implementation of visibility splays any new property created a suburban look. The houses opposite the site had already caused a suburbanised feel to the road.

·                Councillor Law stated that he was satisfied with the size of the properties however, it was the impact on the location, the street scene and the AONB that posed a problem for him.

·                In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework any development within the AONB should enhance it and in his view this was not the case in this instance.

·                The ground sloped upwards on the site and therefore it was the height of the site that was the problem. The applicant for the Claregate site had been required to bring the site levels down and Councillor Law felt this was required as part of the current application.

·                Councillor Law stated that Members had three options. They could approve or refuse the application, or alternatively they could approve the application with a condition added to reduce the floor level of the site by an amount that would reduce the impact without requiring a new application.

Councillor Emma Webster asked Councillor Law to clarify the difference in impact between reducing the site by 3 metres to reducing it by one metre. Councillor Law stated that he would be happier with a reduction by one metre than the site remaining at the existing proposed level.

Councillor Bridgman referred to the Claregate site and asked what the size of the site was in comparison to the site under consideration. Councillor Law confirmed that the size of the two sites was about the same.

Councillor Crumly asked for clarification on whether the Committee was considering reducing the ridge height of the two dwellings. Councillor Law sated that it would be the foundation that would be reduced in height rather than the ridge height of the properties.

Councillor Marigold Jaques noted that the levels at Claregate had been reduced by three metres. The Moorings was two metres lower than plot one and there was a slope down to the road and therefore 3 metres in the case of the current application would be excessive and one metre would be more acceptable.

The Chairman asked Officers what would be deemed as an acceptable height reduction, without a further planning application being required. Mr David Pearson stated that a condition should not substantially change an application. If the Committee was seeking to lower the foundation by one metre, then this was to the upper limit of what could be conditioned. To ask the applicant to implement a lower ground level of up to one metre would be reasonable.

Councillor Chopping asked if the floor level was what would need to be reduced or if it was the foundation. The aim was to reduce impact. Mr Pearson confirmed that the ground and floor level would need to be reduced so the properties sat lower on the plot. Councillor Chopping was concerned that the floor level could be lowered however, the ridge height kept the same. Councillor Bridgeman confirmed that the ridge level relative to surrounding fixed points would reduce as a result of lowering ground levels.

Councillor Macro asked if demolition and bonfires could also be added to conditions. Mr Pearson felt that demolition was a reasonable point to be included within the method statement however, other legislation dealt with the burning of waste. It was not the role of planning applications to reduce risk on other close by properties. Councillor Law queried if this could be included as an informative. It was felt that this would be acceptable.

Councillor Quentin Webb referred to landscaping and queried if hedges were required as part of the new design. Mr Simon Till confirmed that the landscaping section of the report detailed the sizes and varieties of hedges required. If felt appropriate, Members could control the size and type of hedges alongside Blandys Lane and the Listed building with conditions. Councillor Webb acknowledged that by doing this Members could ensure that the impact on the view of the ridge height of the properties could be softened.

Councillor Chopping felt that the two properties were of good design and were a vast improvement on what currently stood on the site. The design was similar to that of High Banks, which was a very attractive property. The site was within the settlement boundary so there was a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Councillor Chopping stated that he was happy with the proposal as long as a condition was added to reduce the impact of the properties by one metre. It was felt that condition 15 could be amended to this affect. Conditions should also cover concerns raised by Councillor Webb concerning landscaping. On these grounds Councillor Chopping proposed that the Officer recommendation to approve planning permission be granted.

The Chairman summarised the conditions that needed to be added as follows:

·         Landscaping alongside Blandys Lane and the Listed building;

·         Reduction in the levels by one metre;

·         Hours of working.

The Chairman asked if Officers were happy with the proposed conditions and Mr Pearson confirmed that he was. Councillor Richard Crumly therefore seconded the proposal by Councillor Chopping.

Members felt that there was an additional condition that needed to be added to the proposal covering:

·         Restrictions on the locations air handling and other plant.

Both Councillor Chopping and Councillor Crumly confirmed that they were happy with this addition. Conditions were summarised in full as follows:

·         Landscaping alongside Blandys Lane and the Listed building;

·         Reduction in the levels by one metre;

·         Hours of working;

·         Demolition;

·         Restrictions on the locations air handling and other plant;

·         An informative on the risk of bonfires to nearby thatched properties.

Mr Pearson did not feel that a condition to restrict air handling and other plant would be reasonable, as the installation of such plant is either outside of the remit of planning or subject to existing controls under the permitted development regime. Councillor Webb felt that demolition works were already covered by the Construction Method Statement on page 68.

Councillor Bridgman felt that reducing the levels on site by one metre was a good idea. However, the highest of the two proposed properties was 1.3 metres lower than High Banks. Councillor Law stated that this needed to be viewed in context. High Banks was a larger property but it was down hill from the application site and on the opposite side of the road. The proposal was imposing and would detract the AONB and street scene.

The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal put forward by Councillor Chopping, seconded by Councillor Crumly. At the vote the motion to grant planning permission was approved.

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

Conditions

1.    Full planning permission time limit

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); to enable the Local Planning Authority to review the desirability of the development should it not be started within a reasonable time.

2.         Standard approved plans

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers 1066.12, 1066.15, 1066.11, 1066.13 and 1066.14 received on 30 August 2017.

Any material change to the approved plans will require a formal planning application to vary this condition under Section 73 of the Act.  Any non-material change to the approved plans will require a non-material amendment application prior to such a change being made.

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

3.         Samples of materials

Development of the approved dwellings shall not commence until a schedule and samples of the external materials to be used in construction of the dwellings has been submitted and approved in writing under a formal discharge of conditions application. Development of the dwellings shall take place in accordance with the approved schedule and samples of materials.

Reason: Additional information on materials is required due to the visual sensitivity of surrounding views from the AONB. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

4.         Construction method statement

No development 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 any security hoarding

(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

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

5.         Parking in accordance

No dwelling shall be occupied until the vehicle parking and turning spaces have been surfaced, marked out and provided in accordance with the approved plans.  The parking and turning spaces shall thereafter be kept available for parking of private motor cars 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) and Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

6.         Drive gradient

The gradient of the private drives on the site shall not exceed 1 in 8.

Reason: To ensure that adequate access to parking spaces and garages is provided. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

7.         Access surfacing

No development shall take place until details of the surfacing arrangements for the vehicular access(es) to the highway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall ensure that bonded material is used across the entire width of the access(es) for a distance of 3 metres measured back from the carriageway edge. Thereafter the surfacing arrangements shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.                                                 

Reason: To avoid migration of loose material onto the highway in the interest of road safety. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

8.         Visibility splays

No development of the dwellings hereby approved shall take place until visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 43 metres have been provided at the access.   The visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of all obstructions to visibility above a height of 0.6 metres above carriageway level.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

9.         Cycle storage

No development shall take place until details of the cycle parking and storage space have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  No dwelling shall be occupied until the cycle parking and storage space has been provided in accordance with the approved details and retained for this purpose at all times.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate and safe cycle storage space within the site.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

10.      Landscaping plan

No development or other operations shall commence on site until a detailed scheme of landscaping for the site is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include schedules of plants noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities, an implementation programme and details of written specifications including cultivation and other operations involving tree, shrub and grass establishment.  The scheme shall ensure;

a)         Completion of the approved landscape scheme within the first planting season following completion of development.  

b)         Any trees shrubs or plants that die or become seriously damaged within five years of this development shall be replaced in the following year by plants of the same size and species.

The scheme shall ensure the reinstatement of a hedge alongside Blandys Lane and reinforcement of the boundary vegetation alongside Moorings to the south.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of a satisfactory scheme of landscaping in the interests of improving the visual contribution of the site to surorunding amenity and to soften the impact of the development on views from Blandys Lane, alongside the Grade II Listed dwelling to the south and within the wider AONB, in accordance with the NPPF and Policies CS14, CS18 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026.

11.      Tree protection

No development (including site clearance and any other preparatory works) shall take place 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. This 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.

12.      Removal of Permitted Development Rights for extensions and outbuildings

Irrespective of the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended), or any subsequent revision thereof no extensions or outbuildings shall be erected in the curtilage of the dwellings hereby approved without planning permission having first been granted on a planning application made for this purpose.

Reason: The site is in a visually sensitive location in the AONB and adjacent to the curtilage of a Grade II Listed building. This condition is imposed in order to prevent the overdevelopment of the site, detrimental visual impacts in a sensitive location in the AONB on the edge of the settlement or adverse visual impacts on the setting of the adjacent Grade II Listed building in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), and Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

13.      Removal of Permitted Development Rights for alterations to roof

Irrespective of the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended), or any subsequent revision thereof no alterations or extensions to the roofs of the dwellings hereby approved without planning permission having first been granted on a planning application made for this purpose.

Reason: The site is in a visually sensitive location in the AONB and adjacent to the curtilage of a Grade II Listed building. This condition is imposed in order to prevent detrimental visual impacts in a sensitive location in the AONB on the edge of the settlement or adverse visual impacts on the setting of the adjacent Grade II Listed building in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), and Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

14.      Removal of Permitted Development Rights for side windows in south facing elevation of plot 1

Irrespective of the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended), or any subsequent revision thereof no additional windows shall be installed in the south facing elevation of the approved dwelling on plot 1 unless they are obscure glazed and fixed shut except for parts that are more than 1.7 metres above the floor level of the room served.

Reason: In order to prevent any adverse impact on the privacy and amenity of the neighbouring dwelling, Moorings in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

15.      Levels

Irrespective of the details of levels shown on the approved plans, no development of the approved dwellings or other operations on the land (excluding demolition of the existing dwelling and structures) shall commence until full details of the proposed ground levels, floor levels and all engineering operations to the bank alongside Blandys Lane have been submitted and approved under a formal discharge of conditions application. Such details shall ensure a reduction in finished floor level of the proposed dwellings of no less than 1 metre below those shown on drawing numbers 1066.13 and 1066.14 received 30 August 2017. The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until the levels have been created in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: Additional information on levels is required in order to ensure that no detrimental impact on visual amenity in the North Wessex Downs AONB and neighbouring amenity arises from the proposed works in consideration of their two storey nature and the high existing levels on the site compared to those of other properties on the west of Blandys Lane, and in particular the Grade II Listed dwelling known as Moorings to the south. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

16.      Set back of gates

No gates shall be installed across the access drive to the site shall unless they are erected at a distance of at least 5 metres from the highway edge. Any such gates shall open inwards.

Reason: To prevent the obstruction of the highway, in the interests of highway safety in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framwork (2012) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

17.      Sustainable Drainage condition

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 development hereby permitted and within the application site. The development 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 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).

18.      The hours of work for all contractors, site operatives and other persons employed in the development of the dwelling hereby approved shall, for the duration of development, be limited to:

7.30 am to 6.00 p.m. on Mondays to Fridays 8.30 am to 1.00 p.m. on Saturdays and NO work shall be carried out on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers in accordance with the NPPF (2012) and Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

INFORMATIVE

During the committee meeting on 8th November 2017, Members expressed concerns with the lighting of bonfires on the site due to the presence of thatched roof on Moorings and Thatchers to the south. The applicant is advised not to light bonfires in the vicinity of these buildings.

 

 

 

Supporting documents: