Agenda item

Proposal:	Erection of a three storey extension to the front elevation of The Lodge to provide additional rooms.
Location:	The Lodge at Newbury Racecourse, Racecourse Road.
Applicant:	Newbury Racecourse.
Recommendation:	The Head of Development & Planning be authorised to GRANT conditional planning permission subject to completion of a Section 106 legal agreement.

 

(Councillors Phil Barnett and Tony Vickers declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4(4) by virtue of the fact that they were members of Newbury Town Council and Greenham Parish Council and their respective Planning and Highways Committees, which had discussed this application. 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 that they had been lobbied on Agenda Item 4(4).)

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(4)) concerning Planning Application 19/00225/COMIND in respect of the erection of a three storey extension to the front elevation of The Lodge to provide additional rooms The Lodge at Newbury Racecourse, Racecourse Road.

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 acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement, and 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 highlighted the comments in section 4.1 of the report. He confirmed that officers had raised concerns at the level of parking available within the proposal on race days. However, the applicant had given assurances that they had an effective car park management system in place that should ensure that parking was managed, and that there would be sufficient parking for this proposal on race days. As a result, officers were satisfied with the proposal and had no objection.

Removal of speaking rights

4.     As resolved at the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 29 April 2020, public speaking rights had been removed for virtual Council meetings. This right had replaced with the ability to make written submissions. This decision was made in accordance with The Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panels Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

5.     The above changes to speaking rights were subsequently amended at the Council meeting on 10 September 2020. It was agreed that parties making written submissions in relation to a planning application would be invited to attend the remote meeting of the Planning Committee to answer any questions that Members of the Committee might wish to ask in order to seek clarification on any part of their statement.

6.     In accordance with the Extraordinary Council resolution, written submissions relating to this application were received from Mr Raymond Beard, objector. Mr Beard attended the meeting.

7.     Individual written submissions were published online along with the agenda

http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=155&MId=5741&Ver=4

Objector’s Submission

8.     The Clerk read out the representation. Members did not have any questions relating to the written submission.

Ward Member Representation

9.     Councillor Phil Barnett in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         He observed that there was a lot more accommodation in and around Newbury than ever before.

·         Fewer people were travelling now, even taking Covid-19 into consideration, and it was likely that this trend would continue in future, so he questioned whether there would be a need for additional overnight accommodation in future.

·         Access to the site was not straightforward, and many people would prefer to stay at a hotel on the major road network. Therefore, this additional accommodation would only be required for special events or race days.

·         Although there had only been two formal requests for noise and disturbance to be investigated, as a local Ward Member, he had been called on many occasions in the last 2 to 3 years regarding disturbance at the back of the complex. Local residents had been affected by the existing accommodation.

·         The Rocking Horse Nursery was located round the corner from the application site, and it would not be desirable for outside drinking to take place where it could affect young children.

·         Parking issues would need to be addressed. If the proposal were to be approved and occupied to its maximum capacity, this could attract a large number of vehicles. This could affect residents’ parking, which was already restricted.

Member’s Questions to the Ward Member           

10.  Councillor Hilary Cole noted that Councillor Barnett had been approached by residents about previous disturbances at the site, and asked if he had reported these to Environmental Health or encouraged residents to do so. Councillor Barnett indicated that he had advised residents to report the issue directly. He stated that a number of residents had notified the Environmental Health Team in relation to a particular disturbance at the time of the Hennessy Gold Cup weekend. However, residents had felt that their concerns had not been addressed by the team. He observed that issues were not always related to noise, and other anti-social, alcohol related behaviour took place on occasion.

Members’ Questions to Officers

11.  The Chairman asked for clarification on potential parking issues, particularly if the hotel were to be fully occupied. He asked if the priority would be for hotel guests, and if the parking area was normally available to people attending race meetings. Mr Goddard indicated that there would be a surplus of 20 spaces on a race day with the hotel occupied. There was no evidence that there would be a shortfall, although it was getting close to it.

Debate

12.  Councillor Tony Vickers opened the debate. He did not see the point in refusing this application after the last one had been approved. He suggested that having most of the rooms in one place would make it less likely to have further smaller facilities situated on the site, since they would be more difficult to manage. He was disappointed as he had supported the original racecourse development back in 2009, since it represented an excellent site for housing due to its sustainability. However, it had become apparent that the racecourse was only interested in the housing as a cash cow, and they were not interested in providing a community or creating footfall in Newbury Town Centre. He suggested that having a hotel on the site would make it less likely for people to spend time in Newbury. However, there was no opportunity to change that through the planning process. It was obvious to him that the Racecourse considered itself to be an entertainment business with houses on the side. He observed that although it was a strategic housing site, it was not becoming a community.

13.  Councillor Hilary Cole agreed with Councillor Vickers, but noted that the 40 bedrooms had been granted as part of a previous application, so she did not see any alternative, but to approve this one. She expressed concern about where the balance of the 47 remaining rooms would be built out. She considered it to be piece-meal development rather than a well-thought-out business plan, and suggested that the racecourse should have already thought about the implications of the investment in a larger hotel, rather than cobbling together the stable hands accommodation.

14.  Councillor Hilary Cole proposed to accept officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to a Section 106 agreement being secured and subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Andy Moore.

15.  Councillor Dennis Benneyworth agreed with Councillor Hilary Cole and wondered about the commercial viability of the project, but indicated that was a matter for the applicant to consider.

16.  The Chairman noted that the business plan was discussed at the previous meeting when it had been suggested that the funding for the hotel should have been agreed at the early stages of the project.

17.  The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Hilary Cole, seconded by Councillor Andy Moore to grant planning permission subject to a Section 106 agreement being secured and subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that providing a Section 106 Agreement has been completed by three months of the date of this committee (or such longer period that may be authorised by the Head of Development and Planning, in consultation with the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Western Area Planning Committee), to delegate to the Head of Development and Planning to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the conditions listed below.

OR, if a Section 106 Agreement is not completed within three months of the date of this committee (or such longer period that may be authorised by the Head of Development and Planning, in consultation with the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Western Area Planning Committee), to REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION for the reasons listed below.

Conditions

1.    Three years for commencement

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.    Approved drawings

The development hereby approved shall take place in accordance with the following approved drawings:

SK20, SK23, SK27, SK28, SK29, SK30, SK33, SK34, SK35, SK36, SK37.

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

3.    Materials

The external materials to be used in the approved extensions shall match those used in the existing lodge and shown on the approved drawings.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with the NPPF and Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

4.    Construction Management Plan

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 security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing (if any)

(e)  Wheel washing facilities

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

(g)  HGV haul routes

(h)  the control of noise

(i)    the control of dust, smell and other effluvia;

(j)    the proposed method of piling for foundations (if any);

(k)  hours during the construction when delivery vehicles, or vehicles taking materials, are permitted to enter or leave the site

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 (July 2018), Policies CS5 and CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policies OVS6 and TRANS 1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

5.    Parking in accordance with drawings

The extension hereby approved shall not be occupied until the parking has been provided in accordance with the approved drawings. The parking area shall thereafter be retained and kept available for the parking of motor vehicles.

Reason: In order to ensure that the site is provided with sufficient parking in accordance with the NPPF, Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012 and Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan (1991-2006) Saved Policies 2007.

6.    Cycle Storage

The extension hereby approved shall not be occupied until details of motorcycle parking and cycle storage to be provided on the site have been submitted and approved under a formal discharge of conditions application. The development shall not be occupied until the motorcycle parking and cycle storage have been provided in accordance with the approved details. The motorcycle parking and cycle storage shall be retained and kept available for the parking of cycles and motorcycles thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that the site is provided with sufficient storage for cycles and motorcycles to reduce reliance on the private motor car in accordance with the NPPF and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006- 2026) 2012.

7.    Electric vehicle charging points

The approved extension shall not be occupied until details of electric vehicle charging points have been submitted and approved under a formal discharge of conditions application. The electric charging points shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained for charging electric vehicles thereafter.

Reason: In order to facilitate the increased use of electric vehicles in order to reduce reliance on other fuel sources and in order to provide a sustainable form of development in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF and Policy P1 of the West Berkshire Housing Site Allocations DPD (2017).

8.    BREEAM

The extension hereby approved shall not be taken into use until a post construction review demonstrating that the extension has achieved a BREEAM “Excellent” standard of construction has been submitted and approved under a formal discharge of conditions application.

Reason: In order to meet with the requirement for sustainable construction in accordance with the NPPF and Policies CS14 and CS15 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012.

9.    Hours of construction work

No work relating to the extension hereby approved, including works of preparation prior to building operations, shall take place other than between the hours of 08:00 and 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or public holiday.

Reason: To protect the occupiers of neighbouring properties from noise and disturbance outside the permitted hours during the construction period in accordance with the NPPF, Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012 and Policy OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan (1991-2006) Saved Policies 2007.

10.Noise from mechanical plant

The sound rating level (established in accordance with BS4142:2014) of any plant, machinery and equipment installed or operated in connection with this permission, shall not exceed, at any time, the prevailing background sound level at the nearest residential or noise sensitive property.

Reason: In the interests of amenity of residential occupants and hotel guests in accordance with the NPPF, Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012 and Policy OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan (1991-2006) Saved Policies 2007.

11.SuDS

No development shall take place until details of sustainable drainage measures to manage surface water within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

These details shall:

a)    Incorporate the implementation of Sustainable Drainage methods (SuDS) in accordance with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS (March 2015), the SuDS Manual C753 (2015) and West Berkshire Council local standards, particularly the WBC SuDS Supplementary Planning Document December 2018;

b)    Include and be informed by a ground investigation survey which establishes the soil characteristics, infiltration rate and groundwater levels;

f)     Include construction drawings, cross-sections and specifications of all proposed SuDS measures within the site;

g)    Include run-off calculations, discharge rates, infiltration and storage capacity calculations for the proposed SuDS measures based on a 1 in 100 year storm +40% for climate change;

k)    Ensure any permeable paved areas are designed and constructed in accordance with manufacturers guidelines.

m)  Include details of how the SuDS measures will be maintained and managed after completion. These details shall be provided as part of a handover pack for subsequent purchasers and owners of the property/premises;

w)   Any design calculations should take into account an allowance of an additional 10% increase of paved areas over the lifetime of the development.

The above sustainable drainage measures shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details 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, or before occupation of the first dwelling on the site in the event that such a timetable is not submitted. The sustainable drainage measures shall be maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that surface water will be managed in a sustainable manner; to prevent the increased risk of flooding; to improve and protect water quality, habitat and amenity and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system can be, and is carried out in an appropriate and efficient manner. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS16 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Part 4 of Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006) and the Sustainable Drainage Systems SPG (2018). A pre-condition is necessary because insufficient detailed information accompanies the application; sustainable drainage measures may require work to be undertaken throughout the construction phase and so it is necessary to approve these details before any development takes place.

Heads of Terms for Section 106 Agreement

1.    Maximum number of hotel bedrooms on the site

The terms of the Section 106 agreement shall secure that no more than 123 hotel bedrooms are provided on the racecourse site.

Refusal Reasons

1.    Planning obligation

The application fails to provide an appropriate planning obligation to prevent the overprovision of hotel bedrooms in a non-town centre location without adequate justification. The application is not accompanied by sufficient information or a sequential test to demonstrate that it would result in provision of hotel accommodation (a town centre use) in an appropriate location and at a justified amount. Furthermore, due to the extant consent for a 123 bedroom hotel on the racecourse site the proposed works would result in an over-provision of hotel accommodation in this location without justification of local need. The proposed works are therefore contrary to the requirements of paragraph 84 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy CS9 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2026) 2012, requiring that proposals for new business development should not conflict with existing uses.

Informatives

1.    Proactive

This decision has been made in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development having regard to Development Plan policies and available guidance to secure high quality appropriate development. In this application whilst there has been a need to balance conflicting considerations, the local planning authority has secured and accepted what is considered to be a development which improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.