Agenda and minutes

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.

Councillor Carolyne Culver declared an interest in Agenda Item 3(2), but reported that, as her interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, she determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillors Nigel Foot, Tony Vickers, Billy Drummond and Phill Barnett declared an interest in Agenda Item 3(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.

(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).

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 3(1)) concerning Planning Application 24/00908/FUL - 6 Northcroft Lane, Newbury - in respect of a proposal to utilise the building as a SEND School.

2.      Gemma Kirk 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 listed in the report.

3.      The Chairman asked Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application, he noted the following:

·       Highway Officers had assessed this proposal on the basis of the existing uses for the site and considered that the traffic and parking impact from the site was significantly reduced.

4.    Due to a misunderstanding on the requirement to register to speak at Committee, Councillor Andy Moore, Town Council Representative, was not registered to speak for this item. Members resolved to suspend Standing Orders in order to allow Councillor Moore to speak and to reinstate Standing Orders after he had made his representation and answered Members’ questions.

5.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Andy Moore, Town Council representative, Adrian and Helen Gadd, supporters and Gareth Jones, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Town Council Representation

6.      Councillor Moore addressed the Committee – his representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (22:05)

Member Questions to the Town Council

7.    Members asked a question of clarification and were given the following response:

·       They were attempting to encourage extra measures to ensure that the double yellow lines were enforced.

(Standing Orders were reinstated.)

Supporter Representations

8.    Despite joining the meeting remotely, Mr and Mrs Gadd were unable to deliver their representation due to technical issues.

Member Questions to the supporters

9.      Members were unable to ask questions of clarification of the supporters.

Applicant/Agent Representation

10.   Mr Jones addressed the Committee – his representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (29:00)

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

11.   Members asked a number of questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       The allocated parking was for pick up and drop off by the school minibus.

·       The Flood Risk Assessment detailed several mitigation measures that were to be put in place, the flood evacuation plan also produced further measures to ensure safety.

·       The number of students proposed was 15 and the application was limited to such by the conditions.

·       The applicant’s consultants utilised the flood data that was available to them.

·       They were completely content that all parking was exclusively for pick up and drop off.

Member Questions to Officers

12.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Paul Goddard advised the nursery use of the site was an existing one which could resume at any given time. The previous use as a nursery would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.(1)

21. The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 3(2)) concerning Planning Application  24/00571/FUL - Mallards Haven, Frilsham – in respect of a retrospective application for the partial retention of the former bungalow for use as an outbuilding, in association with dwelling approved under Application No. 18/00409/FULD. External alterations and hard landscaping.

22. Catherine Ireland 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 listed in the report.

23. In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Christine Dunn, objector, Mark Pettitt and Oonagh Clark, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

24.Christine Dunn addressed the Committee – her representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (1:16:09)

Member Questions to the Objector

25. Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Applicant/Agent Representation

26.Mark Pettitt and Oonagh Clark addressed the Committee – their representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (1:21:14)

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

27.  Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following response:

·       The toilet contained within the property was in the preexisting building and there was no concern with regards to foul waste.

Ward Member Representation

28.Councillor Carolyne Culver addressed the Committee – her representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (1:27:11)

Member Questions to the Ward Member

29. Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

30. Members asked questions of clarification and were give the following responses:

·       Catherine Ireland advised that a condition on landscaping that required the replacement of any planting that was lost or died within five years could be incorporated however, doing so in perpetuity could have been deemed unreasonable.

·       Simon Till suggested that a condition which required the applicant to submit a landscaping proposal within three months of the date of approval could be considered reasonable. He reminded Members that they had recently discussed requiring retention of landscaping with replacement within ten years of the date of approval.

·       Simon Till highlighted condition 5 noting that there was a requirement within that condition relating to timed operation of lighting.

Debate

31. Councillor Paul Dick opened the debate by expressing his concern with regards to conditions on applications not being enforced, but advised he was supportive of the application based on its merits.

32. Councillor Tony Vickers noted that the national landscape was the result of the carefully managed development of the area over a period of hundreds of years, he advised that he could not see any harm in the property as was proposed.

33.Councillor Vickers proposed to accept Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.(2)

35. The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 24/00767/HOUSE - The Old Rickyard, Inkpen – in respect of the formation of a swimming pool.

36.Michael Butler 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 listed in the report. Simon Till clarified that the recommendation was to delegate officers to approve, as per officers’ recommendation, as varied by the update sheet and subject to the outcome of discussions to secure an acceptable scheme of drainage with any necessary conditions. Or to refuse the application if a scheme of drainage had not been agreed within 3 months or such other timescale as agreed in writing by the Development Manager in consultation with the Chairman of the committee.

37. In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mark Pettitt, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Agent Representation

38.   Mr Pettitt addressed the Committee – his representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (1:52:15)

Member Questions to the Agent

39. Members asked questions of clarification and were give the following responses:

·       A fresh application would be submitted at a later stage for a pool building to be built to store the equipment.

·       A scheme relating to external lighting would, in principle, be acceptable to the applicant.

·       An error was made in submitting the application as floor plans and elevations for the pool building were not submitted as part of the original application.

Ward Member Representation

40.   Councillor Vickers addressed the Committee – his representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee - Tuesday 16h July 2024 (2:08:36)

Member Questions to the Ward Member

41. Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

42.Members asked questions of clarification and were give the following responses:

·       Simon Till advised that the period to submit additional information had expired by the time the lack of documentation relating to the pool building had become apparent to Officers. Because of this, the applicant was advised to withdraw this portion of the application and reapply for permission to construct the pool building in a separate application at a later date.

·       Simon Till advised that conditioning an application that would be approved today on the outcome of a future application would, in his view, be considered unreasonable.

·       Michael Butler advised that an additional condition relating to external lighting would be totally legitimate due to the sensitivity of the area.

Debate

43. Councillor Tony Vickers opened the debate by expressing his desire to have an additional condition in relation to restricted use of external lighting.

44. Councillor Paul Dick further supported the motion.

45. Councillor Carolyne Culver advised there were three other pools in the area and therefore the precedent had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.(3)