Issue - meetings

1.    The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning the erection of a new building containing 5 two bedroom flats with associated infrastructure and landscaping on land adjacent to Greenham House, Greenham Road, Newbury.

2.      Cheyanne Kirby 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 Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports, and the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement or Unilateral Undertaking as outlined in the heads of terms.

3.      Or, if the Section 106 legal agreement or Unilateral Undertaking is not completed, to delegate to the Development Manager to refuse planning permission.

4.    In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, James and Kay Lipscombe, objectors, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

5.      Mr and Mrs Lipscombe addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 24th July 2024 (18:40)

Member Questions to the Objector

6.    Members asked a question of clarification and received the following response:

·       The exit leading onto the A339 was very dangerous. There was no pedestrian access on to Station Road so all pedestrians were to be directed through the same route as the vehicles.

Member Questions to Officers

7.    Members asked questions of clarification and received the following responses.

·       Paul Goddard advised that whilst an access onto Station Road would have been ideal, he considered that the entrance onto the A339 was wide enough to accommodate both pedestrians and traffic due to the limited vehicle numbers expected.

·       Cheyanne Kirby advised that there had been in depth conversations with the drainage team over this application. They had highlighted their feeling that the scheme was not good enough, however the approved scheme on the previous application was the same as the one included on this proposal.

·       Debra Inston advised a condition could be added which required sustainable drainage measures be applied.

·       Cheyanne Kirby believed that the main concern of the drainage team was that there was not enough surface drainage. She noted that she was unsure why SuDS had refused this scheme given that an identical scheme had previously been approved. She highlighted that she could not provide more clarity as she was not a drainage engineer.

·       Paul Goddard advised that the Station Road access was removed by the applicant.

·       Debra Inston noted that this was the first time that she had been made aware of the presence of Japanese Knotweed and suggested that the public protection team would know if it was present on the property. She advised that a condition could be placed on the application stipulating that, if Japanese Knotweed was found, a management plan for its removal would be implemented.

Debate

8.      Councillor Paul Dick opened the debate by advising that his concerns, which related to the drainage of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4