Public Document Pack
A Meeting of the EXECUTIVE will be held in David Hicks 1 - Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham RG40 1BN on THURSDAY 25 OCTOBER 2018 AT 7.30 PM
Manjeet Gill Interim Chief Executive Published on 17 October 2018
This meeting will be filmed for inclusion on the Council’s website.
Please note that other people may film, record, tweet or blog from this meeting. The use of these images or recordings is not under the Council’s control. Our Vision
A great place to live, an even better place to do business
Our Priorities
Improve educational attainment and focus on every child achieving their potential Invest in regenerating towns and villages, support social and economic prosperity, whilst encouraging business growth Ensure strong sustainable communities that are vibrant and supported by well designed development
Tackle traffic congestion in specific areas of the Borough
Improve the customer experience when accessing Council services
The Underpinning Principles
Offer excellent value for your Council Tax
Provide affordable homes
Look after the vulnerable
Improve health, wellbeing and quality of life
Maintain and improve the waste collection, recycling and fuel efficiency
Deliver quality in all that we do MEMBERSHIP OF THE EXECUTIVE
Charlotte Haitham Taylor Leader of the Council Pauline Jorgensen Deputy Leader of the Council, Housing Richard Dolinski Adults Social Care, Health and Wellbeing Pauline Helliar-Symons Children's Services Norman Jorgensen Environment, Leisure and Libraries Philip Mirfin Regeneration Stuart Munro Business and Economic Development and Strategic Planning Anthony Pollock Highways and Transport Simon Weeks Planning and Enforcement
ITEM PAGE WARD SUBJECT NO. NO.
59. APOLOGIES To receive any apologies for absence
60. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7 - 28 To confirm the Minutes of the Extraordinary Executive Meetings held on 17 September and 20 September 2018 and the Executive Meeting held on 27 September 2018.
61. DECLARATION OF INTEREST To receive any declarations of interest
62. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME To answer any public questions
A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice.
The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of the Executive
Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Council or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting. For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions
62.1 Winnersh Paul Fishwick has asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question I first reported Street Light number 5 Robin Hood Lane opposite Winnersh railway station as being out on 15th November 2017, as can be seen from the screenshot provided to the Council.
As this report is now coming up for its 1st anniversary I would like to know what action (if any) has been carried out since I reported this fault?
As a regular user of Winnersh railway station, I have not witnessed this street light functioning since I first reported it, and it is still out at the time of submitting this question.
62.2 Emmbrook Rachel Bishop-Firth has asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question I asked a question in February about the Memorandum of Understanding which the Council and Network Rail signed in 2016 to develop a solution to the Tanhill Lane crossing. This crossing currently has two separate bridges including a steep and unsightly temporary bridge which is very inconvenient for residents.
Keith Baker told me that the Memorandum of Understanding states that ‘Network Rail and Wokingham Borough Council will collaborate on a permanent ramped footbridge solution upon the progression of development proposals for the multi storey car park and the life expiration of the existing stepped footbridge over the Gatwick to Reading line’.
The multi-story carpark has been open for some time now, but the unsightly and inconvenient temporary bridge is still in place.
Could the Executive Member for Highways and Transport please provide an update on what action the Council is taking to progress this project, and when residents can expect to see a permanent ramped footbridge in place?
63. MEMBER QUESTION TIME To answer any member questions
A period of 20 minutes will be allowed for Members to ask questions submitted under Notice
Any questions not dealt with within the allotted time will be dealt with in a written reply 63.1 None Specific Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey has asked the Executive Member for Business, Economic Development and Strategic Planning the following question:
Question When is the Borough Design Guide scheduled to be updated, to reflect changes in the borough including increasing car ownership and renewable energy requirements for new builds?
63.2 None Specific Imogen Shepherd-DuBey has asked the Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement the following question:
Question This week, at our Planning Meeting, I saw housing applications being approved for developments that only provides for just over one car parking space per home. These are often in a locations where there scant provision for public transport and very few services nearby. I have seen housing plans for even less than one space per home in Wokingham, with the excuse of 'it's near the train station'.
Experience shows that we end up with too many cars for the spaces provided. There are several housing developments where residents are desperate for better parking solutions that what has been provided. Most homes have at least two working adults who need to use cars and in other situations, there is not enough space for anyone visiting and often these visitor spots are permanently used by residents to alleviate the parking problems. We end up with cars parking on pavements, grassland and neighbouring streets. Essentially, under- providing car parking in Wokingham, is really, really not working.
I'd like to know what Wokingham Borough Council now and it future plans to stop the chaos of parking problems continuing?
63.3 None Specific Carl Doran has asked the Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement the following question:
Question The Government is currently consulting on changing the planning rules around exploratory drilling for shale gas, with a view to making it a "permitted development" right. Has Wokingham Borough Council made a submission to this consultation? 63.4 None Specific Ian Pittock has asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question Shouldn’t all new roads include both a cycleway and a footway alongside at the time the route is built rather than trying to retrofit these at a later date?
63.5 None Specific Clive Jones has asked the Executive Member for Environment the following question:
Question RE3 have been charging for DIY household waste since September 2016. This is against the advice of two Conservative cabinet ministers and some junior ministers.
Can you advise me when RE3 will be taking the advice of your very senior colleagues and ceasing making these charges which as you know may well be unlawful?
Matters for Consideration
64. None Specific SHAREHOLDERS' REPORT 29 - 38
65. None Specific REVENUE MONITORING REPORT 2018/19 – END 39 - 54 OF SEPTEMBER 2018
66. None Specific CAPITAL MONITORING 2018/19 - END OF 55 - 60 SEPTEMBER 2018
67. None Specific LOCAL PLAN UPDATE (LPU) TOWARDS OUR 61 - 150 STRATEGY CONSULTATION
A decision sheet will be available for inspection at the Council’s offices (in Democratic Services and the General Office) and on the web site no later than two working days after the meeting. CONTACT OFFICER
Anne Hunter Democratic and Electoral Services Lead Specialist Tel 0118 974 6051 Email [email protected] Postal Address Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham, RG40 1BN Agenda Item 60.
MINUTES OF AN EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE HELD ON 17 SEPTEMBER 2018 FROM 7.30 PM TO 8.35 PM
Committee Members Present Councillors: Charlotte Haitham Taylor (Chairman), Norman Jorgensen, Pauline Jorgensen, Stuart Munro and Anthony Pollock
Other Councillors Present Parry Batth Laura Blumenthal Prue Bray Rachel Burgess Gary Cowan Andy Croy Lindsay Ferris Helen Power Angus Ross Imogen Shepherd-DuBey Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey
41. APOLOGIES Apologies for absence were submitted from Councillors Richard Dolinski, Pauline Helliar- Symons, Philip Mirfin and Simon Weeks.
Councillor Laura Blumenthal attended the meeting on behalf of Councillor Richard Dolinski. In accordance with legislation Councillor Blumenthal could take part in any discussions but was not entitled to vote.
42. DECLARATION OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest received
43. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME In accordance with the agreed procedure the Chairman invited members of the public to submit questions to the appropriate Members.
43.1 Annette Medhurst asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question As part of the consultation exercise for the removal of school crossing patrollers’ local schools were contacted, presumably in order to reach a wide distribution of people who regularly use these services. Meadow Nursery School on Murray Road, who provide a statutory service in early years’ education was not contacted nor was there a tick box on the consultation for parents to state that their child attended Meadow Nursery. Why were early years’ settings not considered important voices for the local authority to seek out their opinion during the consultation process?
Answer The purpose of the school crossing patrol service is to assist the safe journey of school aged children through providing a safe crossing facility to enable them to access schools. 7 Early years’ children should be accompanied by appropriate adults who will have the benefit of new 24/7 crossing facilities. I also understand that many pre-school children attend nurseries for half day sessions and the new proposals will assist them and their appropriate adults to cross the road safely at the end of morning sessions and the beginning of afternoon sessions.
I have been unable to find why you were not contacted but my understanding is that all of the LEA schools were contacted.
Supplementary Question So on that basis if you are saying that local authority settings were contacted but early years’ settings were not for the reasons that you outlined. You talk about the safety of lots of people but why were those individuals not considered? I don’t really see why that group of individuals are not considered to have an important voice in this type of exercise.
Supplementary Answer I did not say that early years’ settings were not contacted. The only one I am aware of that was not contacted is yours and I believe that in the assessment of the requirements that early years’ settings have been taken into account in the design and considerations undertaken by the Council.
43.2 Alexandra Fraser asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question Please can you advise under what conditions in the consultation that was carried out what parents and residents could have said for a school to keep their School Crossing Patroller even alongside a new crossing?
Answer If the consultation responses had demonstrated that there had been factors of which the Council was unaware that would undermine the ability to enable safe crossing of the roads close to school crossing patrol locations, this would have resulted in the Council considering alternative proposals. However this did not happen through the consultation process.
Supplementary Question We want to encourage people to walk to school. If this was a consultation just about installing a crossing why was there not the option of keeping the lollipop ladies?
Supplementary Answer Last year we had a number of schools where they already had a crossing, and they had crossing patrollers on them, and we consulted with their removal and they were removed last year and there is no evidence of anything getting worse; in fact the accident statistics got better. I do not see anything from our experience that the removal of crossing patrollers last year, who were on fixed sites, that would imply that we could not do it again.
43.3 Sally Cairns asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
8 Question My particular concern about replacing the school crossing patroller at the Murray Road site with a fixed crossing is that, whilst the school crossing patroller can keep everyone moving, if the site is changed to a fixed crossing, I think there will be times either when there is a big build-up of people on the (relatively narrow) pavement, or times when the traffic ends up queuing back a long way – in both cases, leading to safety issues. At the Scrutiny Committee meeting, it appeared that the key point of the consultation process was seen as being to identify such safety concerns. However, the actual question asked was much more general “Do you have any comments on the proposed changes to safe school crossings?” I think that is just one of the reasons why the consultation was not meaningful – and if the Council seriously wants to get people’s views on the proposed changes, we need to see exactly what the proposed crossing looks like, including whether there are going to be any changes to the pavements or parking arrangements. In the light of the concerns raised, how are the plans for the Murray Road site going to be taken forward?
Answer Having undertaken detailed feasibility studies, the Council is satisfied that a permanent formal crossing can be provided in the vicinity of the school site that would not compromise the safety of school children. However, I understand the concerns raised and will work with our Highways Department and Transport Officers to consider any additional measures that could be put in place to improve the access arrangements at Murray Road. This issue will be dealt with in addition to the issues raised by the removal of the school crossing service and responses to the consultation.
I would add that I have particularly taken care on this site including visiting it. I have consulted with some of my local Members and I have listened to the debate that we had and all of the questions and comments that have been made. I have taken those on board in considering this decision and I have taken them on board in consideration of other matters that may be required to make this a better and safer access to the school so I think I have done that and I will continue to do that. I will continue to be committed to providing safe access to this school and I am aware of the issues that have been raised.
Supplementary Question I very much appreciate that you are taking the issues at this site seriously however I think the overwhelming message of the consultation was that the majority of people did not agree with the Department’s decision that it was a safe thing to do. So my question now as in going forward you are saying that it is going to be something a bit different to what we said anyway and if you have a requirement to consult on significant changes to the safety arrangements out of school are you therefore going to do another consultation? Are you going to enable the people who use the site every day to have some input into whether the proposed changes are actually going to be adequate for the vast numbers of people who cross that road?
Supplementary Answer The main consideration I have had is that the proposal was for a zebra crossing and I have been persuaded that the possibility I need to look at is a puffin crossing. I do not consider that to be a major change. There have been issues raised around car parking particularly at the end of Oxford Road. That is a different matter and is separate from the school crossing patroller situation and if changes to the parking regimes are required they will follow the normal Council processes. I am aware of the situation and I have listened and
9 will continue to listen but I think the principles that we have outlined previously are still valid.
43.4 Alexa Stott asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question At the Extraordinary call-in meeting on September 3rd Cllr Pollock stated that when he visited Murray Road on Monday 23rd July he was impressed by the courtesy of drivers and that he did not see behaviours that would challenge the Council decision to replace the school crossing patrollers with permanent crossings. Given that this date was the end of term and the Nursery School had already closed for the summer the footfall of pedestrians and number of drivers along Murray Road was lower than usual. Does Cllr Pollock have plans to visit the site again, both morning and afternoon to obtain a more realistic picture of the challenges faced by the school community on this site?
Answer While I attended the site on 23rd July, the site had already been fully considered by professionally qualified Highways and Transportation Officers at this point. This had informed the feasibility study of the crossing facility at Murray Road to enable the Council to be satisfied that a safe crossing could be provided in the vicinity of the school crossing patroller site. I have also been in close contact with the relevant Ward Member, who knows the area very well, about this proposal and he has informed the decision.
While the Council has already identified a safe crossing design for the Murray Road site, I am aware of the concerns that have been raised and will work with Ward Members, the school itself and our highways experts to consider any additional measures that may be put in place to improve the access arrangements at Murray Road. I will also consider revisiting the school at an appropriate time.
43.5 Diane Burch asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question 2 c “The original 2015 decision was taken without an underpinning Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) and the subsequent April 2018 EIA did not contain detailed information about consultation with specific groups and did not reflect the individual circumstances relating to each of the proposed crossing sites”
An EIA usually refers to discrimination on the basis of race, gender or disability. As we are concerned with School Crossing Patrollers who deal with children – assuming a more detailed EIA needs to be undertaken may I suggest that these younger residents are considered; on the grounds of age discrimination?
Answer Under equalities legislation the Council has a duty to integrate considerations of equality impact and to supply this in the decision to remove the discretionary school crossing patroller service. A single Equalities Impact Assessment to inform this decision to remove a school crossing patroller service was appropriate in line with this duty.
The design standards of each crossing incorporate the needs of all users including all of these groups protected under the equalities legislation which are: race; age; gender; 10 disability; ethnicity; sexual orientation; religion and beliefs; gender reassignment; pregnancy; and maternity. This is further tested through the safety audit process. Each of the crossings has been assessed on the basis of their individual circumstances to ensure that they are safe and fit for purpose for all residents who may use the crossing. The purpose of the school crossing patroller service is to assist the safety of school aged children by providing a safety crossing facility to enable them to access schools. Early years’ children should be accompanied by appropriate adults who will have the benefit of the new 24/7 crossing facilities.
Supplementary Question Although we have heard many Councillors, including yourself, say that they wish to implement safe crossings can you please say why you believe that static crossings that are unmanned can possibly be safer at school times than those with lollipop men and ladies currently on them and tell us where your statistics come from for such a sweeping generalised statement?
Supplementary Answer About 15 years ago we implemented a Government programme called ‘Safer Routes to School’ where we implemented putting crossings at most of our schools at that time. Those crossings have been in for at least the last 10 years and so we have extensive experience of school fixed crossings at schools as well as all the fixed crossings that exist around the country. These are designed nationally and the evidence in Wokingham is that they are safe and that is why I am satisfied with that.
43.6 Helen Shah asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question Are there any budget implications from the correct procedure not being followed initially, and if there are, where will any shortfall come from?
Answer The Council has undertaken due diligence in assessing the financial implications of the proposal to remove the school crossing patrol service and has correctly assessed the impact on the Council’s budget. The maintenance of the crossings will not have a significant impact on revenue budgets as the additional crossings only represent less than 5% of the increase in the number of crossings in the Borough.
The financial implications of the call-in process has had budgetary implications as school crossing patrollers will potentially have to operate for a longer period at school crossing patroller points. This will be met through the revenue budget which will be diverted from other service areas. The process has also impacted on Council staffing resources but the cost of this has not been quantified. I believe that the correct procedures have been followed however as a result of the call-in there will be additional costs in the 2018/19 budget.
Supplementary Question So is that the impact on the Council being able to provide other things in the area?
Supplementary Answer In theory possibly. In practice probably not.
11 43.7 Keith Malvern asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question In the light of the wide ranging discussion held at the Overview and Scrutiny call in meeting, can I ask whether consideration has been given to a 'horses for courses' approach that would allow, for example, the school crossing patroller to be retained at Murray Road?
Answer I would consider retaining the school crossing patroller if the design and safety issues arising from the crossing design indicated that a safe crossing could not be provided.
Supplementary Question I am disappointed that previous Leaders have considered ‘horses for courses’ as being an appropriate thing to use. What I would like to ask is that it seems to me that the Council is in a hole at the moment and if you are in a hole there are two things that you can do. You are doing the wrong thing you keep digging. Overview and Scrutiny have done you favour as they have provided you with a ladder to get out of this hole by saying that there are other options.
I would like to ask that in the light of this coming document, the proposed ‘Borough Plan 2025’a gripping read and I have only reached page 7 so far and the vision is wrong I can tell you that. What I want to know is page 7 refers to the key areas of focus for Wokingham Borough. What I want to understand from you that includes support at vulnerable times. Do you feel that a school crossing patroller provides support at vulnerable times?
Supplementary Answer When there isn’t a fixed crossing yes.
43.8 Paul Fishwick asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question What site assessments have the Council undertaken at each individual location such as pedestrian counts between 7am and 7pm; corresponding traffic flows between 7am and 7pm during the average day and month as recommended by the Department of Transport’s Local Transport Notes because I am unable to find any evidence whatsoever in your reports.
Answer My understanding from what I have seen is that we have done exactly that. As Mr Fishwick had evidence that his question had been submitted within the relevant timescales but had not been received by Democratic Services it was agreed that a written response would be provided.
44. MEMBER QUESTION TIME In accordance with the agreed procedure the Chairman invited Members to submit questions to the appropriate Members
12 44.1 Gary Cowan asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question Cllr. Ferris in Member questions (26 July Executive minutes para 24.3 refers) challenged the quoted random £600.00 per site for upkeep. He also challenged why there was no replacement costs. My question is including school crossings how many pedestrian crossings in total has WBC got and are they all budgeted at £600.00 per annum for maintenance?
Answer As of September 2018, there are 61 controlled pedestrian crossings in the Borough that are managed by the Council.
Each crossing has the following budget for the purpose of ongoing maintenance.
Tele-communications charges: £57 Electrical Power: £100 Routine maintenance and cleaning: £419 Total Cost: £576
Supplementary Question I would say that with over 20 years as a Borough Councillor I have seen many call-ins and I must say that when I look at this one with 3½-4 pages with what looks like 28 initial elements raised I have never seen so many for a call-in in my whole period at the Council. Just randomly picking on one; no consultation with the Ward Members.
Should we not be worried by this Executive’s views on consultation when 3½ pages worth of comment and observations and rejections from the Overview and Scrutiny referring it back to here has taken place. I think all the public here should listen to this very, very carefully as I see it there is no note of consultation taken by this Borough Council.
Supplementary Answer If you actually read the recommendations from Overview and Scrutiny they don’t actually challenge or say that we should not replace school crossing patrollers with fixed crossings. There are three items that I will talk about later. We have consulted in 2017 on phase one and we have consulted in 2018 on phase two.
As I have repeatedly said the key piece here is to put in safe crossings at these school sites. I have actually asked for improvements to the crossings that were originally proposed at a number of sites which is why they haven’t currently been built and I will continue to look at and take cognisance of the need for safe crossings at all off these school sites. So I dispute your statements Gary.
44.2 Lindsay Ferris asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question At the call-in meeting on Sept 3rd, Cllr Anthony Pollock clearly indicated that he had given authority for the works on the Pedestrian Crossings to continue after the call-in was submitted on 31st July. At the meeting it was established that Cllr Pollock as a single Executive Member did not have that authority and no IEMD was issued. Later in the 13 meeting Josie Wragg confirmed that she gave the authority. I have since discovered that this authority was given retrospectively on 17th August, on her return from holiday. I therefore wish to know who authorised the works to continue in the absence of Josie Wragg to cover the period 31 July through to 16 August as the call-in submission put the decision taken at the 26th July Executive on hold until the issue was resolved?
Answer The Director of Customer and Localities has the delegated responsibility to authorise works through the Council’s capital programme. In the absence of the Director, the Assistant Director has this delegated authority passed to her.
As the current Director was on annual leave when the call-in submission was received by the Council, the Assistant Director authorised the continuation of the works on the pedestrian crossings having discussed this with the Executive Member and I suspect that was what I was referring to when I was asked by the relevant Officer to agree with their view that we should carry on with the work.
Supplementary Question Sorry but I am going to have to query that. The answer I had from Josie Wragg was that she retrospectively authorised the decision not that her Assistant Director had authorised it in her absence. She specifically said retrospectively so there is a mistake or an error here because the Director would not say retrospectively. Retrospectively means to me either nobody made a decision or somebody made a decision who did not have the authority to do it so why would she use those words? So I question that answer.
Supplementary Answer I have spoken to Josie myself and I have raised this issue with her. I have asked her if she is comfortable with the answer I have given you and she has told me that she is and therefore as far as she is concerned what she has said to me is that the process has been properly followed. I cannot answer for your conversations with her I can only answer from my conversations with her.
44.3 Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question When precisely and by whom was the decision made to make the School Crossing Patrollers redundant, the only place I can find is a note about finding an alternative source of funding in the 2015 Medium term financial plan?
Answer The formal notification was made on Monday 11th June 2018 after which statutory staff consultation took place.
Supplementary Question I was told that the original decision was actually made in a Tory party meeting, rather than by an Executive Member that this was going to happen, and this was the original decision as well.
Supplementary Answer I am simply saying to you and I will repeat what I said. The formal letters of notifying the staff of redundancy were made on Monday 11th June; any other discussions are not valid. 14 44.4 Imogen Shepherd-DuBey asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question As part of the call-in meeting we received all of the comments that were sent in as a response to the WBC consultation. The people who responded to this consultation thought that they were being consulted on whether the Lollipop Ladies should be replaced with automated crossings or not. Our Highways Engineer made it clear that the only thing that they were looking for on the responses were legitimate safety considerations regarding the physical installation of the crossings.
In the subsequent report provided to the Executive, this consultation shows the concerns about bad parking, bad driving, children’s safety etc were disregarded. Very clearly, the rare visit from a CPE Officer is not enough to replace the daily presence of a SCP. Two of the schools who had their SCP removed last year have now had to install special holding pens at their gates because of the safety concerns for their children.
We certainly do not feel that the public is being listened to. Please can you advise what will be done to satisfy all of the concerns in the consultation, before the School Crossing Patrollers are actually removed?
Answer In line with the Council’s Consultation Protocol, consultation was undertaken about the removal of the school crossing patroller service. The responses were reported to and fully considered by the Council’s Executive. Prior to this in consultation with Officers I visited and reviewed each of the crossing sites in detail which resulted in two crossings being changed from zebra to puffin and one site provided with a zebra crossing where previously no facility was proposed. In line with the protocol other relevant information was also considered by the Council’s Executive including highway safety issues, the financial implications and the wider benefits of the proposed new crossing facilities for all residents. The Executive considered that the safety benefits of the new crossings, to serve all residents throughout the day and year, outweighed the concerns raised by the respondents; many of which related to poor parking and driving which are not factors that the school crossing patrol service is designed to address.
In line with the adopted Consultation Protocol the Council is committed to listening to its residents but in line with this document it also acknowledges that “a consultation should not be the sole means by which information should be gathered when making a decision. ….. this information is considered alongside other relevant evidence or information about an issue …”
Supplementary Question According to our WBC consultation approach we are legally supposed to consult at the formative stages of a change of service. It is actually a legal requirement which provides sufficient reason to allow us to give ntelligent consideration in the response. I would like to know when we are actually going to get a consultation on the removal of the lollipop lady service because this seems to be a consultation just about whether we should install a crossing or not?
15 Supplementary Answer No this was a consultation in connection with the removal of the service and the replacement with safe crossings.
44.5 Helen Power asked the Executive Member for Highways and Transport the following question:
Question At the call-in on the 3rd of September we heard that there had been only one Equality Impact Assessment for all of the crossings. There appears to have been no consultation with disability groups or the schools about the needs of their children. Input from parents of children with additional needs has not been considered even when they responded to the consultation. Hopefully you are aware that there are different types of disabilities that could be affected by this, including hearing, sight, mobility, learning disabilities, cognitive processing disabilities especially when dealing with children who will have not learned to compensate for these issues yet. As no location is the same, why have these assessments not been done on a location, by location, basis?
Answer Under equalities legislation the Council has a duty to integrate considerations of equality impact and supplied this in the decision to remove the discretionary school crossing patroller service. A single Equalities Impact Assessment to inform this decision to remove the school crossing patroller service was appropriate in line with this duty.
The design standards of each crossing incorporates the needs of all users, including all of those groups protected under the equalities legislation: race; age; gender; disability; ethnicity; sexual orientation; religion and belief; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity. This is further tested through the safety audit process. Each crossing has been assessed on the basis of their individual circumstances to ensure that they are safe and fit for purpose for all residents who may use the crossing.
Supplementary Question In which case why were the Equalities Impact Assessments not done earlier on in the process than April 2018?
Supplementary Answer The individual Equalities Impact Assessments were done during the design process and that would have been done earlier than April 2018 or they were commenced earlier than 2018 so they are a big part of the design process and that would have been included in the design process.
45. CALL-IN OF EXECUTIVE DECISION - SCHOOL CROSSING PATROL SERVICE - CONSULTATION REPORT 2018 The Executive considered recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee who met on 3 September 2018 to consider the ‘call-in’ of the Executive decision relating to the item entitled School Crossing Patrol Service – Consultation Report 2018 which was approved at the Executive meeting held on 26 July 2018 with the following recommendations:
“RESOLVED that: 1) WBC continue with its proposal to provide safe, permanent crossings at the seven locations that currently have a school crossing patroller, and, following 16 their installation, remove the school crossing patrol service once the permanent crossings are complete as set out in Option 2, Appendix 1 of the report;
2) all affected schools be reminded that they have access to the Council’s road safety and My Journey teams who can facilitate further road safety training for pupils if requested.”
The Leader of Council thanked all the questioners, representatives from schools and the school crossing patrollers who had taken the time and effort to be part of the process and the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee for their consideration of the decision. Councillor Haitham Taylor also thanked Councillor Pollock for the time he had spent on the matter, including visiting the different sites.
The Leader of Council invited the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, Parry Batth, to present the findings and recommendations of the Committee. The reasons for the ‘call-in’, as set out in the Agenda, were considered at the Management Committee meeting held on 3 September 2018. A number of witnesses attended the meeting and gave evidence following which the Management Committee considered its findings and agreed the following resolution:
“RESOLVED That: 1) the Executive be requested to review their 26 July 2018 decision on the School Crossing Patrol Service in light of the evidence presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee;
2) the request to the Executive for a review is based on the following reasons:
a) the original 2015 decision to remove the School Crossing Patrol Service was taken prior to the consultation, and, with the substantive decision having been taken, subsequent consultation exercises were not seen as meaningful;
b) the original 2015 decision was taken without an underpinning business case and the 26 July 2018 Executive report did not contain detailed information showing the current costs of the service and the full financial implications relating to the proposed implementation, maintenance and future replacement of the new permanent crossing facilities;
c) the original 2015 decision was taken without an underpinning Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) and the subsequent April 2018 EIA did not contain detailed information about consultation with specific groups and did not reflect the individual circumstances relating to each of the proposed crossing sites.”
In presenting the recommendations, Councillor Batth clarified that the purpose of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was not to challenge the decision made by the Executive but was to scrutinise the procedures and processes used by the Executive to make the decision.
17 Councillor Batth highlighted that the Committee had felt that the Executive should review the following areas in relation to the decision it made and bear these in mind for future decisions: consultation; the business case and the Equality Impact Assessment all of which were related to the actions taken in 2015. It was noted that consultation had taken place in 2018 and it was felt that more information would have been helpful in the form of a business case. The Leader of Council thanked Councillor Batth for presenting the recommendations of the Management Committee.
The Executive Member for Highways and Transport reminded the Executive of the process that had been followed in reaching this decision. In 2015, due to the reduction in Government funding, the Council had decided to look at alternative sources of funding to pay for the school crossing patroller service but unfortunately this did not materialise. Therefore in 2017 a decision was made, following consultation and an impact assessment, to remove a number of school crossing patrollers where fixed crossings existed. In 2018 consideration was given to removing the school crossing patrol service and replacing the service with fixed crossings. This was consulted upon including the design aspects relating to the equality impact assessments. Councillor Pollock explained that the key dates were actually 2017 and 2018 when consultation took place and the Council’s procedures were followed.
In response to a number of questions from Executive Members Councillor Pollock confirmed that there had actually been a reduction in the number of accidents on crossings where school crossing patrollers had been removed but pointed out that the number of accidents had been low in the first place. In addition the crossings would be available 24/7 so would be available for children entering or leaving schools at other times of the day e.g. breakfast and after school clubs and other people accessing schools at all times of the day.
With regard to the fact that some people said that school crossing patrollers take responsibility for bad parking and bad driving Councillor Pollock confirmed that school crossing patrollers had authority from the Council, as the highways authority, to step out into the road and stop cars to allow children to cross the road on their way to school. They did not, however, have any statutory duty or responsibility to undertake any other roles.
Councillor Haitham Taylor asked whether school crossing patrollers would be reintroduced if it was subsequently found that it was proved that school crossing patrollers were required for a safer operation of fixed crossings? Councillor Pollock stated that serious consideration would be given to the reintroduction if it was found necessary however it was expected that if there were to be an issue this would have been highlighted in the design process.
The Executive Member for Highways and Transport responded to the recommendations of the Management Committee and in relation to the first recommendation reiterated the information he had provided earlier in the meeting in relation to the process that had been followed. Councillor Pollock reminded the meeting that following the consultation in 2018 a number of safety enhancements were made to some of the sites eg changing a pelican to a puffing crossing. In addition, with regard to the Murray Road site, a lot of work had been done to ensure that the issues and matters raised were addressed and he confirmed that he would continue to visit the site and talk to the Headteachers about the issues in that area. With regard to the issues and concerns raised by Overview and Scrutiny in relation to the consultation process that had been followed, Councillor Pollock stated he would be mindful of these when undertaking any future consultation. 18 Councillor Lindsay Ferris disputed Councillor Pollock’s comments about the 2015 decision as on many occasions at the call-in meeting it was stated that the decision to cease the school crossing patrol service was made in 2015 and this was not challenged by anyone at that meeting and this was clearly stated in the minutes. Councillor Batth, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, stated that recommendation 2b) was more about the decision being taken without an underpinning business case and the report not containing sufficient information on the current costs of the service.
Councillor Pollock reiterated that the Executive report considered on 26 July 2018 had contained information around the business case and the decision to cease the service was actually made at that meeting and not before. The proposal may have been considered and consulted upon and other options may have been considered but the decision was not taken until 26 July.
In relation to the recommendation concerning the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) Councillor Pollock felt that the Council had abided by the requirements of the Equality Impact Assessment Legislation as an EqIA was completed on the proposal to remove the service and each of the designs incorporated all the features relating to the EqIA of each individual site.
Councillor Ferris challenged the Executive Member for Highways and Transport’s assertion that pedestrian crossing were safer as he didn’t feel that that the statistical information that was available accorded with DfT standards. Councillor Pollock confirmed that there were 61 crossings in the Borough and the evidence from those showed that these types of crossings were safe.
In conclusion the Leader of the Council stated that she welcomed the Overview and Scrutiny Management’s recommendations on consultation which showed that in future there was a need to ensure that consultations were more meaningful for all residents. The recommendation about business cases highlighted that these should be presented in a way that was clear and understandable to all residents and accessible EqIA statements should also be included.
To summarise, Councillor Pollock stated that he taken on board the concerns raised by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee but felt that the Executive had complied with the criticisms raised and would be happy to take away the comments made about consultation and EqIAs because they could always be improved. He therefore asked the Executive to confirm their original decision.
RESOLVED That:
1) having considered and taken into account the findings and recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee the Executive confirmed its decision of 26 July 2018. That:
a) WBC continue with its proposal to provide safe, permanent crossings at the seven locations that currently have a school crossing patroller, and, following their installation, remove the school crossing patrol service once the permanent crossings are complete as set out in Option 2, Appendix 1 of the report;
19 b) all affected schools be reminded that they have access to the Council’s road safety and My Journey teams who can facilitate further road safety training for pupils if requested.
2) the comments made by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee be noted.
20 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE HELD ON 20 SEPTEMBER 2018 FROM 6.30 PM TO 6.45 PM
Committee Members Present Councillors: Charlotte Haitham Taylor (Chairman), Richard Dolinski, Pauline Helliar- Symons, Norman Jorgensen, Pauline Jorgensen, Philip Mirfin, Stuart Munro and Anthony Pollock
Other Councillors Present Lindsay Ferris Clive Jones Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey
46. APOLOGIES An apology for absence was submitted from Councillor Simon Weeks.
47. DECLARATION OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest received.
48. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME There were no public questions received.
49. MEMBER QUESTION TIME There were no Member questions received.
50. HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION TERM SERVICE CONTRACTS RENEWAL The Executive considered a report relating to the results of the procurement process that had been carried out for the renewal of the Highways and Transportation Terms Service Contracts i.e. the Professional Services Consultancy Contract (PSCC) and the Maintenance and Construction Contractor (MCC) which would deliver highways and transportation services to Wokingham with effect from 1 April 2019.
The Executive Member for Highways and Transport highlighted that previously externalised highways maintenance operatives and specialists would be brought back in- house and because the recommended company had other local contracts this would provide greater resilience, particularly if an emergency arose.
Councillor Pollock went on to emphasise the benefits of the new contract which in addition to providing a better quality service would also result in more roads resurfaced and more pot holes filled. A new mapping system would also be introduced which would enable residents and Councillors to log into the system and report issues and then track their progress.
In response to a query from Councillor Norman Jorgensen about whether, if the contract was successful, additional items could be added in the future it was confirmed that this would be feasible as would the possibility of other councils being offered the opportunity to take advantage of services provided by the contract.
21 The Leader of Council wanted gave her thanks to the Officers involved in the contract negotiations for all their hard work and highlighted the stakeholder involvement that had taken place and the cross-party working.
Councillor Haitham Taylor reminded Members that due to the Alcatel period the name of the contractor must remain confidential until 3 October 2018.
RESOLVED that:
1) the procurement process which commenced with stakeholder engagement in 2016, soft market engagement with potential suppliers during 2017 be noted;
2) the formal procurement process which has been underway since January 2018 and proposals for mobilisation be noted;
3) Full Council be recommended to award the Professional Services Consultancy Contract to the organisation named in the Part 2 papers to be operational from 1 April 2019, for an initial term of seven years, extendable by a further period of up to three years, subject to satisfactory performance;
4) Full Council be recommended to award the Maintenance and Construction Contract to the organisation named in the Part 2 papers to be operational from 1 April 2019, for an initial term of seven years, extendable by a further period of up to three years, subject to satisfactory performance.
22 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE HELD ON 27 SEPTEMBER 2018 FROM 7.30 PM TO 8.02 PM
Committee Members Present Councillors: Pauline Jorgensen (Chairman), Richard Dolinski, Pauline Helliar-Symons, Norman Jorgensen, Philip Mirfin, Anthony Pollock and Simon Weeks
Other Councillors Present Malcolm Richards
51. APOLOGIES Apologies for absence were submitted from Councillors Charlotte Haitham Taylor and Stuart Munro.
52. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The Minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 26 July 2018 and the Extraordinary Executive held on 28 August 2018 were confirmed as correct records and signed by the Deputy Leader of Council.
53. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Norman Jorgensen declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 54 Shareholders’ Report by virtue of the fact that his wife was a paid Non-Executive Director of WBC Holdings Ltd. Councillor Jorgensen remained in the meeting during discussions and voted on the matter.
Councillor Pauline Jorgensen declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 54 Shareholders’ Report by virtue of the fact that she was a paid Non-Executive Director of WBC Holdings Ltd. Councillor Jorgensen remained in the meeting during discussions and voted on the matter.
Councillors Philip Mirfin and Anthony Pollock declared personal interests in Agenda Item 54 Shareholders’ Report by virtue of the fact that they were paid Non-Executive Directors of Optalis Holdings Ltd. Councillors Mirfin and Pollock remained in the meeting during discussions and voted on the matter.
54. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME In accordance with the agreed procedure the Chairman invited members of the public to submit questions to the appropriate Members.
54.1 Therese Doherty had asked the Executive Member for Regeneration the following question. Due to her inability to attend the meeting a written reply was provided:
Evidence of recent joy riding skid marks, why are there no health and safety dividers between vehicles and pedestrians in Market Place?
Answer Following consultation, it was agreed that one of the key objectives for the Market Place project was to de-clutter the area in order to make it more attractive to shoppers and better for hosting community events. Therefore, the design attempted to keep signage and 23 barriers to a minimum and we believe this has been achieved and that the Market Place now looks far more welcoming to all visitors. However, safety is our primary concern and a safety audit of the site has been carried out in order to assess all issues, including vehicles illegally ignoring the no entry signs and driving on to the pedestrian area.
There is a balance between allowing time for everybody to get used to the new layout and the obvious need to ensure safety. We believe the right way to achieve this balance is through the professional, independent safety audit carried out and we will make any modifications deemed necessary once we have the findings.
55. MEMBER QUESTION TIME In accordance with the agreed procedure the Chairman invited Members to submit questions to the appropriate Members
55.1 Gary Cowan had asked the Executive Member for Environment, Leisure and Libraries the following question. Due to his inability to attend the meeting a written reply was provided:
Can the Executive Member responsible for Minerals and Waste confirm that all the evidence gathered by this Council to date on this subject has been or will be made available to Hants CC?
Answer Hampshire Services have been jointly commissioned by the four authorities of Wokingham, Bracknell Forest, Reading and RBWM (known as the central and eastern Berkshire authorities) to prepare a Joint Minerals and Waste Plan. The Joint Plan will provide a robust strategy to ensure there is an adequate mineral supply and to ensure the sustainable management of waste.
A large amount of data and information has been made available by all authorities through the plan preparation process to assist with work to prepare the Plan. In some cases, due to previous joint working, this has included data collected at a Berkshire wide scale. Officers continue to liaise regularly with Hampshire Services.
56. SHAREHOLDERS' REPORT (Councillors Norman Jorgensen, Pauline Jorgensen, Philip Mirfin and Anthony Pollock declared personal interests in this item)
The Executive considered a report setting out the budget monitoring position and providing an operational update on the work of the Council Owned Companies for the period to 31 July 2018.
Councillor Pollock went through the report and with regard to Wokingham Housing Ltd highlighted: the profit of £600k that had been generated; the operational loans of £1m which had been repaid to the Council; the plans to deliver 360 new homes over the coming years with between 50 and 75 homes every year; and the sites that were currently being programmed through the planning system.
The report showed that Optalis had achieved cost savings of over £1m per annum, which was equivalent to approximately £8m over the life of the company. Councillor Pollock reminded Members that the turnover had increased as a result of the merger with the
24 Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead which would provide a good basis for growth. It was noted that the profit for 2018/19 was estimated to be £48k.
Councillor Pollock advised that following the departure of the previous Chief Executive of Optalis a number of inspections by CQC rated services as “requiring improvement”. He was pleased to report that Martin Farrow, the new Chief Executive, had put in place systems which it was believed would assist in achieving a “good” rating at future CQC inspections.
During an explanation of how Optalis’s profit was worked out Councillor Pollock highlighted the private work that had been undertaken by the Company including the Supported Employment Contract with Reading College which assisted young people with learning disabilities gain employment. He was pleased to report that 9 out of 10 customers who entered the service gained employment or work experience as a result of the programme.
Members noted that Angela Morris, the previous Operations Director, had now taken on the joint role of Director of Adult Social Services with the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead.
Councillor Norman Jorgensen was pleased to note that work was due to start on the Tape Lane site. It was confirmed that 5 x 3-bedroom houses, 5 x 2-bedroom houses and one bungalow would be built on that site; all of which would be Council housing, the first for some while.
RESOLVED that:
1) the budget monitoring position for the month ending 31 July 3018 be noted;
2) the operational update for the period to 31 July 2018 be noted.
57. 21ST CENTURY COUNCIL - UPDATE The Executive considered a report setting out the progress of the Council’s 21st Century change programme.
During her introduction of the report the Deputy Leader of Council drew Members’ attention to recent improvements to the Council’s website, including the new mapping software. In the longer term it was expected that faults, eg with street lights etc, could be reported using this software. Members also noted that a Permanent Director of Children’s Services, Carol Cammiss, had recently been appointed.
Councillor Pollock was pleased to note that the £4m savings expected from the C21 change programme were still on target to be delivered; even if the timing was going to be different to that originally envisaged. In response to a query from Councillor Pollock it was confirmed that customer satisfaction with the new systems and processes would be monitored.
Members were advised by Councillor Weeks that the Planning Department’s complete database and search system, which had not been available during the week as part of the major upgrade, was expected to be available on Monday 1 October.
RESOLVED: That the progress in implementing the 21st Century Council programme be noted. 25 58. APPROVAL OF RE3 WASTE STRATEGY The Executive considered a report relating to the proposed re3 Waste Strategy as approved by the re3 Joint Waste Board on 27 April 2018.
The Executive Member for Environment advised the meeting that the Waste Strategy contained two principle aims: to reduce the net cost of disposing of waste; and to recycle 50% of Wokingham’s waste by 2020. By diverting waste from the most expensive disposal methods towards recycling could deliver savings of around £100 per tonne. Councillor Jorgensen stated that in order to achieve these aims there was a need to maximise the use of the existing services eg black boxes, green waste collection and the glass bank system. In addition new services, such as the food waste service which was due to be introduced from April 2019, were expected to add around 7% to the Council’s recycling figure.
Councillor Jorgensen highlighted the fact that there were some items, eg bottom ash from the incinerator and wood currently used in biomass energy from waste, which although strictly recycled were not allowed to be counted towards the Council’s targets. If they were counted it was noted that they would have added a further 15% to the Council’s recycling figures.
Members were advised that earlier this year re3 had introduced a scheme whereby green waste, which had come from the recycling centres, gone for composting and then back as compost had been sold to residents. This had proved to be very popular and had sold out within a couple of weeks. The plan was to sell more compost next spring.
Councillor Weeks queried whether accepting pots, tubs and trays, which commenced in April, had made a measurable increase. Councillor Jorgensen stated that it was too early to give a definitive answer but it was looking very encouraging.
Councillor Jorgensen highlighted the recent opening of the Waste Recycling Centre to visitors as part of Recycling Week and advised that this had proved very popular and showing the process of separating waste into different streams had received positive feedback.
Councillor Mirfin queried whether the soon to be introduced collection of food waste would have an impact on the increase in the rat population in certain areas of the Borough. It was confirmed that food would be stored and put out in secure, strong, plastic containers so rats and cats should not be able to access the contents and this should assist with the problem.
In response to a query about the inferior nature of the current blue bin bags Councillor Jorgensen stated that there had been a problem with the machine that produced the bags but confirmed that in the future the bin bags would revert to the previous style and quality.
REVOLVED that:
1) the re3 Waste Strategy 2018-2020, as recommended by the re3 Joint Waste Disposal Board on 27 April 2018, be adopted;
2) the outline objectives allocated to Wokingham with the Strategy, as set out in attachment 1 to the report and the Executive Summary, be noted. 26 59. AMENDMENTS TO SACRE CONSTITUTION The Executive considered a report setting out proposed amendments to the SACRE Constitution which would revise the membership requirements for SACRE.
In her introduction of the report the Executive Member for Children’s Services provided background to the work of SACRE which was a statutory body that advised on the teaching of Religious Education in schools. Councillor Helliar-Symons went through the proposed changes, one of which was that instead of stating the number of representatives from specific Christian denominations the four representatives could come from any of these denominations. A similar change was proposed to the representation in the Teachers and Teaching Union group.
Councillor Helliar-Symons felt that the proposals should help with attendance and make it easier to fill the vacancies that existed.
RESOLVED: That the amendments to the SACRE Constitution – Section 1 Membership Structure, as set out in the Appendix to the report, be accepted.
60. WOKINGHAM HOUSING LIMITED (WHL) DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES - WELLINGTON ROAD/STATION ROAD AND FORMER WOODLEY AGE CONCERN SITES The Executive considered a report setting out a proposal that a Council owned housing company be selected as the development partner for housing schemes at Wellington Road/Station Road, Wokingham and the former Woodley Age Concern Site in Woodley.
In introducing the report the Executive Member for Housing drew Members’ attention to the two sites that were being proposed for development of more affordable housing and thanked the Ward Members for their help in making sure that the schemes were right for the relevant Wards. Councillor Jorgensen advised that the scheme would be funded by a mixture of S106 commuted sums, borrowing and grant funding. It was noted that 9 x 1- bed and 10 x 2-bed apartments were being proposed on the Wellington Road site and 10 houses, with a tenure mix of social rent and shared ownership, on the Woodley Age Concern site which would provide opportunities for people who required housing but may not be able to afford full commercial rates.
In relation to the Wellington Road/Station Road site Councillor Mirfin stated that he was delighted the proposal was going forward, particularly as the site was one of the gateways into the Town and had been derelict for a long time. He advised that it was important to get the right design on the site and to this end the Council had been working and would continue to consult with local residents to ensure that what was being proposed was right for the area.
RESOLVED that:
1) Wokingham Housing Limited or another Council-owned Local Housing Company be selected as the development partner for housing schemes at the following sites:
Land at Wellington Road/Station Road, Wokingham; Land at the former Woodley Age Concern, South Lake Crescent, Woodley.
27 2) the Council transfers the Wellington Road/Station Road and land at the former Woodley Age Concern sites to a Council-owned housing company on terms to be agreed by the Director of Corporate Services in consultation with the Lead Members for Housing and Finance;
3) the sites subject to Recommendation 1 above are appropriated for planning purposes under section 227 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972;
4) the proposed funding model, including the allocation of up to £550,000 Section 106 receipts for the provision of affordable housing, in accordance with the Part 2 Report, be approved;
5) the development brief for these sites, including the proposed tenure mix be approved;
6) the transfer of land and funding for the Wellington Road/Station Road and former Woodley Age Concern site developments will be subject to WHL securing a planning consent for the schemes and the necessary Board approvals.
28 Agenda Item 64.
TITLE Shareholder’s Report
FOR CONSIDERATION BY The Executive on 25 October 2018
WARD None specific
DIRECTOR Graham Ebers, Director of Corporate Services
LEAD MEMBER Charlotte Haitham Taylor, Leader of Council
PURPOSE OF REPORT (INC STRATEGIC OUTCOMES)
Transparency in respect of Council Owned Companies
RECOMMENDATION
The Executive is asked to note:
1) the budget monitoring position for the month ending 31st August 2018;
2) the operational update for the period to 31st August 2018.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is to update the Executive on the performance and progress on those subsidiary companies that the Council has a controlling shareholder interest in.
Housing. The Council has established a group of wholly-owned housing subsidiaries in order to provide much needed affordable housing across the Borough whilst generating a financial return for the Council; this return contributes to the Council’s aspiration of becoming increasingly independent of central government support.
The housing group has now become well established and last year Wokingham Housing Limited (WHL) built 123 new homes; these were then sold within the group to Loddon Homes Limited (LHL) and Berry Brook Homes Limited (BBHL) generating a profit of just over £600k. Also in 2017/18, WHL were able to pay off £1 million of its operational loan back to the Council.
WHL is working hard on its future development pipeline, planning to deliver a further 360 new homes over the coming years. Projections are for WHL to construct and deliver between 50 and 75 homes every year, with an annual profit target of at least £1 million.
Adult Care Services. Optalis Group (Optalis) was established to be the Council’s provider of choice for Adult Care Services. Its key objectives were to provide safe and good quality Adult Social Care Services commissioned by the Council at a reduced cost and to provide a financial return to the Council. To date a reduction of costs amounting to over £1m per annum costs have been realised and following a recent merger with RBWM, the business has expanded from an annual turnover of £11 million to £40 million. This will enable Optalis to grow and create further financial returns through economies of scale and allow the company to generate additional steams of income.
29 Strategy and Objectives of the Council’s Subsidiary Companies There has been no change to the strategy and objectives of any of the Council’s subsidiary companies since the last report to Executive in September 2018.
Operational Update An operational update is provided in section 1 for each of the companies as at 31st August 2018. Any changes to the Directorships of the companies is provided at the end of the relevant company’s operational update.
Financial Report A budget monitoring report is provided in section 2 for each of the companies for August 2018.
30 BACKGROUND Housing Group
Operational Report
WHL Schemes In Progress/Under Development: Summary: WHL delivered 123 new homes in 2017/18, and have now delivered 141 homes in total since 2011. Another 14 homes have planning permission and are either on site or being put into development shortly.
WHL has around 360 units in the identified development pipeline, which would provide a net gain of units of around 150 additional homes, as 240 of these are on the Gorse Ride South regeneration project.
In terms of extending the development pipeline beyond the 360 potential units already identified, work is ongoing with Property Services (PS) to look at potential Council assets that could be developed to add to the development pipeline and help provide additional affordable housing and also homes for private rent and sale in the Borough. WHL are also looking at other opportunities outside of WBC assets to deliver the shareholders objectives, which include joint ventures with other organisations.
As a result of the much reduced and slower pace of development activity than expected in 2018/19, WHL will need to again start borrowing working capital loans soon from WBC, despite having paid off £1m of working capital debt last year. Although WHL has been self-financing so far this year, we expect to make a loss overall, before returning to profitability again in 2019/20.
SITE: PROGRESS: Norton Road There is some slippage in the programme as a result of the (9 units) extreme hot weather in June, July and early August. Units will soon be watertight, which will allow a reassessment of the programme and what lost time can be caught up to try and achieve the January completion date deadline. To date the net valuation is £790k against the contract sum of £1.631m – c. 48%.
Pipeline site with planning permission:
SITE: PROGRESS: Finch Road Discussions with Francis Construction are moving to completion (2 units) and they are in conversation with SSE to get the dates for moving the electric cable agreed which will take place before the start on site date to ensure we do not incur unnecessary prelim costs. Middlefields Resource Building Services are expected to start on site in (2 units) September, and we are working through the pre- commencements planning requirements to be signed off by planning.
31 Tape Lane Contracts for building the development with LIFEBuild have now (11 units been signed and are being engrossed. The development for the agreement between WBC Housing Services and WHL has also HRA) been signed, with a start on site scheduled for October.
Gorrick The fire strategy needed to cater for one of the residents that the Square scheme is being built for has been agreed by the fire officer so (1 units) WHL can now work to get the tender documentation finalised. A WBC resource has been identified to lead on acting as the conduit between the families and WHL.
There have been no changes to WHL company directors since the last report.
Loddon Homes Limited (LHL) Loddon Homes’ first shared ownership homes at Elizabeth Road (2 units) and Barrett Crescent (2 units) are close to being sold. Loddon Homes are expecting sales income to be £115k more than originally estimated at £0.5m because of higher tranche sales than the 35% minimum.
As well as achieving shared ownership sale, Loddon continues to focus on ensuring WBC Housing Services fill all voids quickly.
Fosters is still only three quarters full, although 3 of the 8 vacancies have recently been allocated to and will hopefully soon be filled. At Loddon’s September Board meeting the issue of voids at Fosters and loss of income was discussed and the Board have now formally asked WBC to relax the allocations criteria to get these vacancies filled and income secured as soon as possible.
Loddon Homes was forecast to make a profit in 2018/19 for the first time since being set up in 2014. As a result of the reduced development activity in 2018/19, where fewer projects are coming through than forecast and some projects having started later than originally anticipated, the profits expected from shared ownership sales in 2018/19 are much lower and will move in to 2019/20. When combined with the reduced rental income at Fosters due to voids, Loddon Homes now expect to make a loss this year, with ongoing profitability being delayed until 2019/20. If rental income at Fosters had been as forecast with units being filled much more quickly, the company would have broken even or made a small profit.
Changes to Directors:
There have been no changes to Loddon Homes’ company directors since the last report.
Berry Brook Homes Limited (BBHL)
Berry Brook is monitoring closely WBC Housing Services and how they are managing Berry Brook’s stock, especially at Phoenix Avenue where a second residents meeting is due to take place in October. Housing Services have been taking a proactive approach to defects management at Phoenix where the contractor Hill continue to need to be tightly managed. To help put more pressure on Hill, the 32 Employers Agent role has been changed by WHL and is now being much more thorough in working with Housing Services on defects identification and management.
Berry Brook Homes is working towards purchasing the 22 key worker apartments in Wokingham town centre at Peach Place from WBC Town Regen and ensuring that allocations are prompt and arrangements for management are effective. Units are expected to come in to the company in early January.
Deciding how Berry Brook can best achieve its objectives of providing dividends back to WBC and also deliver housing that is needed in the Borough, is under keen discussion with our sister companies. With the dual issues of a slower than expected development pipeline combined with changes to Government housing policy, Berry Brook’s business plans need a complete overhaul and rethink. The company hopes to have a clearer idea of its future strategy and best way of delivering its objectives later in the Autumn.
Changes to Directors:
There have been no changes to Berry Brook Homes’ company directors since the last report.
2. Financial Report
WBC (Holdings) Group (comprising WBC (H)L, WHL, LHL and BBHL)
WBC Holdings- Profit & Loss P:5 Aug-18 Month YTD Full Year Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance Budget Forecast Variance £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K Income 89 64 25 356 307 49 1,069 1,019 49 Expenditure (106) (78) (28) (424) (388) (36) (1,272) (1,236) (37) Operating Profit/(Loss) (17) (14) (3) (68) (81) 13 (204) (216) 13
There is a contra-variance on income and expenditure reflecting a slower drawdown of loan capital by the subsidiary companies, resulting in a corresponding slower drawdown by WBC (Holdings) Ltd. Assuming schemes complete within budget and planned timescales, the full year forecasted outturns will show a smaller projected loss than originally budgeted for WBC Holdings and its subsidiary companies.
33 Wokingham Housing Limited (WHL)
Wokingham Housing Limited - Profit & Loss P5: Aug-18 Month YTD Full Year Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance Budget Forecast Variance £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K Income 26 112 (86) 983 1,323 (340) 5,644 5,644 0 Expenditure (232) (286) 54 (1,117) (1,416) 299 (5,729) (5,729) 0 Operating Profit/(Loss) (206) (174) (32) (134) (93) (41) (85) (85) 0
Income & Expenditure:
Income for August 2018 at WHL was £112k, which reflected a £86k positive variance due to higher construction revenue from the LHCs than budgeted. Year-to-date revenues reached £1,323k, which reflected a £340k positive variance due to higher construction revenue from the LHCs than budgeted.
The higher monthly income was countered by £286k of costs, which were £54k higher than budgeted. Year-to-date costs were £1,416k which reflected a £299k negative variance. These variances were due in part by an equivalent amount of higher expenditure as mentioned above countered by lower than budgeted losses incurred from the Grovelands development after completion in July.
The operating loss in August was £174k, which was £32k better than budgeted and the year-to-date loss was £93k, reflecting a £41k positive variance.
Loddon Homes Limited (LHL)
Loddon Homes Limited- Profit & Loss P5: Aug-18 Month YTD Full Year Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance Budget Forecast Variance £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K Income 39 38 1 662 150 512 1,310 1,310 0 Expenditure (33) (40) 7 (577) (153) (424) (1,083) (1,083) 0 Operating Profit/(Loss) 6 (2) 8 85 (3) 88 227 227 0
Income & Expenditure:
Income for August 2018 at LHL reached £38k, which is roughly in line with budget with a £1k negative variance. Year-to-date income of £150k reflects a £512k negative variance, due to sales from shared ownership not occurring in the period. However, demand for the completed properties has been strong with deposits
34 secured on all properties, and LHL completed on both Elizabeth units in September with the Barret units expecting to complete in October.
Expenditure reached £40k in the month, which was £7k higher than budget due to higher repairs and maintenance charges than budgeted. Year-to-date costs of £153k were £424k better than budgeted, which was a result of the costs of sales for the above shared ownership properties not flowing through the profit & loss statement until sales are completed.
The operating loss of £2k in August 2018 was £18k lower than budget due to the variances explained above. The year-to-date operating loss of £2k is £95k below budget, primarily due to shared ownership sales not completing in the period as explained above.
Berry Brook Homes Limited (BBHL)
P5: Aug-18 Month YTD Full Year Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance Forecast Budget Variance £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K Income 49 49 0 259 248 10 586 637 (51) Expenditure (22) (16) (6) (110) (88) (22) (295) (284) (11) Operating Profit/(Loss) 27 33 (6) 149 160 (12) 291 353 (62)
Income & Expenditure:
Income in August 2018 at BBHL reached £49k, which was in line with the budget. Year-to-date income of £248k reflected a £10k negative variance.
Expenditure reached £16k in the month, which reflected a £6k positive variance against budget. Year-to-date expenditure reached £88k, which was £22k better than budget. These variances were due to lower direct property costs and tight control of overheads in the month. However, as the properties time out of the 1 year defects period, costs may revert to budget in coming months.
Operating profit in the month of £33k was £6k higher than budget, and the year-to- date operating profit of £160k reflects a £12k positive variance against budget.
Adult Care Services Group
1. Operational Report
Optalis Limited
General: 35 Our focus on delivering quality services continues, following our recent “good” CQC ratings across our Extracare Housing schemes (Alexander Place, Beeches Manor, Fosters and Birches) and our six bedded residential home. Additionally, our Suffolk Lodge residential care service has also received a “good” rating. All these services 12 months ago were requiring improvement. Our excellent progress in this area has not gone unrecognised. We have now been asked by CQC to visit a local residential care home to advise them on delivering high quality dementia services.
The external year-end audit has reported an increase in surplus in FY17/18 over the previous year.
Customer satisfaction levels are tracking at 87% which compares favourably to similar organisations.
Optalis has contributed to a UK Grant Thornton report on local authority trading companies giving Optalis a national presence. Optalis was also subject to a full page review in the Municipal Journal which further raised our profile.
Our work with Wokingham Borough Council to establish new pathways of care to give our residents enhanced services is underway and will be considered as part of an overall business case.
We held our first Customer conference with customers from across the organisation taking part in an inclusive day, as we continue to reflect and respect the views and ambitions of those we support. We are also in discussions with Involve as we engage with the third sector to support community work across the locality.
2. Financial Report
Optalis Group (comprising Optalis Ltd, Optalis Wokingham Ltd and Optalis Holdings Ltd.)
P:5 Aug-18 Month YTD Full Year Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Aug-18 Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance Budget Actual Variance £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K £K Income 3,844 3,773 71 18,928 18,690 238 66,766 66,766 0 Expenditure (3,842) (3,773) (69) (18,912) (18,656) (256) (66,718) (66,718) 0 Operating Profit/(Loss) 2 0 2 16 34 (18) 48 48 0
August 2018 results:
Optalis are reporting a £34k profit for the first four months. This is above budget and split between the RBWM and WBC contracts. A quarterly reconciliation will be taken to align the figures to Contract and therefore there may be adjustments to these figures. Private business is currently performing below what was anticipated but this is expected
36 to increase from the September figures when the current year’s SES Reading College contract begins.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE RECOMMENDATION The Council faces severe financial challenges over the coming years as a result of the austerity measures implemented by the Government and subsequent reductions to public sector funding. It is estimated that Wokingham Borough Council will be required to make budget reductions in excess of £20m over the next three years and all Executive decisions should be made in this context.
How much will it Is there sufficient Revenue or Cost/ (Save) funding – if not Capital? quantify the Shortfall Current Financial See other financial Yes Revenue Year (Year 1) implications below Next Financial Year See other financial Yes Revenue (Year 2) implications below Following Financial See other financial Yes Revenue Year (Year 3) implications below
Other Financial Information The Council will benefit from reduced costs in commissioning services, the interest and management charges to WBC (Holdings) Ltd and future profits paid out as dividend. These will be factored into the Medium Term Financial Plan under the appropriate service.
Stakeholder Considerations and Consultation
Not applicable – information report only
Resourcing and Timeline for Next Steps
Not applicable – information report only
Timeline for Review and Evaluation
Not applicable – information report only
List of Background Papers None
Contact Kajal Patel Service Resources Telephone 07769957900 Email [email protected]
37 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 65.
TITLE Revenue Monitoring Report 2018/19 – End of September 2018
FOR CONSIDERATION BY The Executive on Thursday, 25 October 2018
WARD None specific
DIRECTOR Director of Corporate Services - Graham Ebers
LEAD MEMBER Charlotte Haitham Taylor, Leader of Council
PURPOSE OF REPORT (INC STRATEGIC OUTCOMES)
Effective management of the Council’s finances to ensure value for money for council tax payers, tenants and schools.
RECOMMENDATION
The Executive is asked to:
1) note the quarter two position of the revenue budget and the level of balances in respect of the General Fund, Housing Revenue Account, Schools Block and the Authority’s investment portfolio;
2) note that there are no Carry Forwards estimates to the general fund identified at this stage.
3) note the updates on the Adult Social Care action plan and the Children’s Services Action Plan (previously High Needs Block action plan).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To consider the Revenue Monitoring, General Fund, Housing Revenue Account, Schools Block and Treasury Management Reports. The Executive agreed to consider Revenue Monitoring Reports on a quarterly basis.
The General Fund is reporting an adverse variance of £1,871k (1.46%) against planned spend of £128.3m, Housing Revenue Account a variance of £52k (4.94%) against a net planned spend of £1.0m and Schools Block an adverse variance of £1,853k (1.35%) against a net planned spend of £136.9m.
39 BACKGROUND
General Fund
The table below shows the forecast outturn position for 2018/19 by Directorate. Details of the General Fund summary are shown in Appendix A.
2018/2019 - End of Year Position Approved Forecast (Favourable) / Directorate Budget Spend Adverse Variance £,000 £,000 £,000 Adult Social Services £47,287 £48,087 £800
Chief Executive £5,630 £5,630 £0
Children’s Services £30,831 £31,827 £996
Corporate Services £9,422 £9,497 £75
Customer and Localities £35,151 £35,151 £0
Net Expenditure Total £128,320 £130,191 £1,871
The end of year position represents a forecast adverse variance of £1,871k on the General Fund.
Material areas of favourable / adverse variances include;
Adult Social Services – net adverse variance of £800k. This reflects continued significant pressures in adult social care commissioned care and support for Older People and, in particular, Learning Disability.
While there has been significant investment in Learning Disability budgets in recent years, the number of individuals living longer, and being supported to live independently in the community, has continued to exert budget pressure.
The impact of the national living wage has driven increases in placement prices across the sector. While the number of older people being admitted to care home settings is reducing as more people are supported in their own homes, care home spend has continued to rise reflecting increasing cost of placements.
As a result of positive progress made by the Adult Social Care Improvement Board, the adverse variance has reduced from £1.5m reported in quarter one.
Chief Executives – no material variances identified at present.
Children’s Services – net adverse variance of £996k. This reflects demand led pressures in Children's social care staffing budgets, with pressures also experienced in Home to School Transport. Pressures in part offset by underspends in placement budgets and will continued to be reviewed to seek additional savings. 40 Corporate Services – no material variances identified at present. Cost pressures from increased business rates at Shute End and other corporate properties. There are other cost pressures within the directorate, due to use of interim staff to cover staff sickness and vacancies. These pressures will be offset by debt management and other activities efficiencies.
Customer and Localities – no material variances identified at present. Following the recent 21st Century Council transition to the new directorate, budgets are being aligned to reflect the new structures.
General Fund Balance
General Fund balances as at 31 March 2019 are estimated to be £5.665m including estimated carry forwards of £0m.
The Statement of General Fund balance is shown in Appendix C.
Housing Revenue Account (HRA)
The Housing Revenue Account reports a forecast adverse variance of £52k against a net planned spend of £1,044k.
No material variances identified at present.
The estimated HRA balance as at the 31st March 2019 is £2,961m. Shown in Appendix D.
Schools Block (Dedicated Schools Grant ‘DSG’)
Schools are funded through a direct grant from Central Government known as Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). This is used to fund individual schools through an agreed formula, costs associated with Early Years Services, support for children with Special Educational Needs (SEN), and to fund relevant support services. This year the Schools Block reports a forecast adverse variance of £1,853k against a net budgeted spend of £136,925k – this represents 1.35% of the total budget. Shown in Appendix E.
The overspend on the DSG relates to ongoing pressure on the High Needs Block, in particular in relation to placements made out of borough and with independent special schools.
The number of pupils with SEN within Wokingham has risen by almost 15% since 2015/16, with the proportion of those with Social, Emotional and Mental Health or Autistic Spectrum Disorder increasing beyond that seen both nationally and across South East local authorities. Demand for suitable placements has out-stripped that available locally, resulting in an increasing reliance on costly independent and out of borough provision. This in turn has increased pressure on Council funded home to school transport budgets.
As at 31st March 2019, the estimated DSG balance will be a deficit of £1.853m. An action plan to address this deficit is referred to later in this report and involves close working with the DfE.
41 Investment Portfolio
The authority's investment portfolio shows current investments of £89.5m being invested by the Council. This is made up of £89m invested with approved institutions (e.g. banks, building societies, councils, etc.) and £0.5m invested in daily money market funds.
Adult Social Care Action Plan Update
The Adult Social Care Improvement Board, initiated by the Chief Finance Officer and Director of Adult Services from June '18, continues to oversee the identification and deliver of all possible actions with a view to bringing spend in line with the initial base budget.
Actions underway include: • extensive reviews of high cost packages of care, and a reduction in double handed care plans where appropriate, • identification and maximisation of appropriate external funding sources, • improved use of block contracts, and • more robust contract management, finance and commissioning processes.
It is currently anticipated to generate cost reductions of £800k - £1m for 2018/2019, with this now reflected in the reduced forecast overspend of £800k.
Detailed monitoring of actions and planned benefits is being taken forward, and updates will accompany future revenue monitoring reports.
Children’s Services Action Plan
Following the previously reported establishment of the High Needs Action Plan, the scope of work has now been widened by the Director of Children’s Services in recognition of the increasing pressure also being experienced within Social Care.
Opportunities for in-year cost reductions and longer term financial sustainability are being considered across Education and Social Care services, with all possible actions for delivering a balanced budget position and reduce the deficit under review.
Updates will accompany future revenue monitoring reports.
Analysis of Issues
Effective monitoring of budgets is an essential element of providing cost effective services and enables any corrective action to be undertaken, if required. Many of the budgets are activity driven and can be volatile in nature.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE RECOMMENDATION The Council faces severe financial challenges over the coming years as a result of the austerity measures implemented by the Government and subsequent reductions to public sector funding. It is estimated that Wokingham Borough Council will be required to make budget reductions in excess of £20m over the next three years and all Executive decisions should be made in this context.
42 How much will it Is there sufficient Revenue or Cost/ (Save) funding – if not Capital? quantify the Shortfall Current Financial - General Fund Yes Revenue Year (Year 1) £128m
Next Financial Year - General Fund Yes Revenue (Year 2) £N/A Subject to MTFP review
Following Financial - General Fund Yes Revenue Year (Year 3) £N/A Subject to MTFP review
Other Financial Information The Council will continue to review cost reduction measures to contain expenditure with the overall approved budget.
Stakeholder Considerations and Consultation Stakeholders should be reassured of the effective management of the Council’s resources.
Resourcing and Timeline for Next Steps Improvement boards have been established with updates being provided to the Executive at the next quarterly revenue monitoring report.
Timeline for Review and Evaluation Revenue monitoring reports are reviewed and evaluated on a monthly basis by directorate leadership teams and corporate leadership team (CLT). Executive will be updated in October with the quarter two position. The ASC Improvement board will meet on a regular basis with updates being provided to CLT and Executive.
List of Background Papers Appendix A – Revenue monitoring report September 2018. Appendix B – General Fund carry forwards. Appendix C – Statement of general fund balance. Appendix D – Housing Revenue Account monitoring report September 2018. Appendix E – Schools Block monitoring report September 2018.
Contact Bob Watson Service Business Services Telephone Tel: 07801 664389 Email [email protected]
43 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018 GENERAL FUND SUMMARY End of Year Position Current Current Net over / Directorate Approved Forecast (under) Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Budget spend £,000 £,000 £,000
Significant pressures in adult social care commissioned care and support, in particular Learning Disability. Savings targeted in-year under the governance Adult Social Services 47,287 48,087 800 of the Adults Improvement Board are on track to deliver an improved position over the remainder of the financial year.
Chief Executive 5,630 5,630 0 No material variances identified. 45
Significant demand led pressures in Children's social care staffing budgets, with pressures also experienced in Home to School Transport . Pressures in Children's Services 30,831 31,827 996 part offset by underspends in placement budgets and will continued to be reviewed to seek additional savings.
Business rate cost pressure of £75k for Shute End and other Corporate Properties. There are other cost pressures within the directorate, due to use of Corporate Services 9,422 9,497 75 interim staff to cover staff sickness and vacancies. These pressures are being managed, but may result in a £50k overspend at year - forecast on budget at present whilst mitigation is being reviewed 30,831 31,827 No material variances identified. Budgets are being aligned following C21C Customer and Localities Services 35,151 35,151 0 transition. A clearer picture will be available for the Exec report at month end 35,151 35,151 Revenue Expenditure Total 128,320 130,191 1,871
Overspend as % of current budget 1.46% Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
ADULT SOCIAL SERVICES
Directors - A. Morris Executive Member for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing - Richard Dolinski
End of Year Position Service Current Current Net over / Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Approved Forecast (under) spend Budget
£,000 £,000 £,000
Adult Social Care - excl. Mental Health Continued significant pressures in adult social care Expenditure 52,786 53,586 800 commissioned care and support, in particular Learning Income (10,865) (10,865) 0 Disability. Net 41,921 42,721 800 Adult Social Care - Mental Health
46 Expenditure 3,004 3,004 0 No material variances identified. Income (296) (296) 0 Net 2,708 2,708 0
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges 44,629 45,429 800
Internal and Capital Charges 2,658 2,658 0
Total 47,287 48,087 800
Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
CHIEF EXECUTIVES
Chief Executive - M. Gill Leader of the Council - Charlotte Haitham Taylor Deputy Leader - Pauline Jorgensen Executive Member for Business, Economic Development and Strategic Planning - Stuart Munro Executive Member for Regeneration - Philip Mirfin
End of Year Position Service Current Current Net over / Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Approved Forecast (under) spend Budget
£,000 £,000 £,000
Chief47 Executives Office Expenditure 2,198 2,198 0 No material variances identified. Income (2,655) (2,655) 0 Net (456) (456) 0 Council Wide Savings Expenditure 0 0 0 No material variances identified. Income (211) (211) 0 Net (211) (211) 0 Town Centre Regeneration Expenditure 25 25 0 No material variances identified. Income 0 0 0 Net 25 25 0 21st Century Council Programme Expenditure 838 838 0 No material variances identified. Income 1,005 1,005 0 Net 1,843 1,843 0
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges 1,201 1,201 0
Internal and Capital Charges 4,428 4,428 0
Total 5,630 5,630 0 Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
CHILDREN'S SERVICES
Directors - J. Leivers Executive Member for Children's Services - Pauline Helliar-Symons
End of Year Position Service Current Current Net over / Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Approved Forecast (under) spend Budget
£,000 £,000 £,000
Learning & Achievement Expenditure 1,859 1,859 0 No material variances identified overall, however increasing Income (569) (569) 0 pressures being managed in-year on a non-recurring basis. Net 1,290 1,290 0 Social Work & Early Intervention Services Significant demand led pressures in Children's social care 48 Expenditure 15,511 16,301 790 staffing budgets. Some pressures will be offset by underspends Income (1,172) (1,172) 0 in placement budgets and will continued to be reviewed to seek Net 14,339 15,129 790 additional savings. Strategic Commissioning & Central Services Expenditure 5,792 5,998 206 Continued pressures on Home to School Transport reflects the Income (753) (753) 0 increasing costs associated with SEN services and out of Net 5,039 5,245 206 borough placements.
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges 20,667 21,663 996
Internal and Capital Charges 10,164 10,164 0
Total 30,831 31,827 996
Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018 CORPORATE SERVICES Director - G Ebers Executive Member for Finance, 21st Century Council, Internal Services and Human Resources - Vacancy (Interim - Charlotte Haitham Taylor)
End of Year Position Service Current Current Net over / Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Approved Forecast (under) spend Budget
£,000 £,000 £,000
Governance & Improvement Expenditure 1,921 1,921 0 No material variances identified. Income (662) (662) 0 Net 1,258 1,258 0 Business Services Business rate cost pressure of £75k for Shute End and other Corporate Properties. Expenditure 22,456 22,531 75 Cost pressures due to use of interim staff to cover staff sickness and vacancies, (3,442) (3,442) 0 which are being managed, but may result in an overspend at year end - forecast on Income budget at present due to savings in shared legal services. 49 19,013 19,089 75 Net Corporate Services Expenditure 552 552 0 No material variances identified. Income (302) (302) 0 Net 250 250 0 S&C People Commissioning Expenditure 971 971 0 No material variances identified. Income (17) (17) 0 Net 953 953 0 S&C Place Commissioning Expenditure 1,792 1,792 0 No material variances identified. Income (22) (22) 0 Net 1,769 1,769 0 Housing Needs & Benefits - CS Expenditure 23,205 22,599 (605) No material variances identified. Income (23,480) (22,875) 605 Net (275) (275) 0 Public Health Expenditure 4,998 4,998 0 No material variances identified. Income (5,680) (5,680) 0 Net (683) (683) 0
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges 22,286 22,361 75
Internal and Capital Charges (12,865) (12,865) 0
Total 9,422 9,497 75 Appendix A REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
CUSTOMER AND LOCALITIES SERVICES Director - J Wragg Executive Member for Environment, Leisure and Libraries - Norman Jorgensen; Executive Member for Housing - Pauline Jorgensen Executive Member for Highways and Transport - Anthony Pollock; Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement - Simon Weeks
End of Year Position Service Current Current Net over / Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Approved Forecast (under) spend Budget £,000 £,000 £,000
Community Services Expenditure 325 325 0 Income 0 0 0 Net 325 325 0 No material variances identified. Customer & Localities Expenditure 4,291 4,291 0 Income (518) (518) 0 Net 3,773 3,773 0 No material variances identified. Delivery & Infrastructure Expenditure 3,072 3,072 0 Income (2,042) (2,042) 0 Net 1,031 1,031 0 No material variances identified. 50 Development - Policy & Planning Expenditure 52 52 0 Income 0 0 0 Net 52 52 0 No material variances identified. Place Expenditure 22,500 22,500 0 Income (5,458) (5,458) 0 Net 17,043 17,043 0 No material variances identified. Development - Management & Expenditure 246 246 0 Enforcement Income 0 0 0 Net 246 246 0 No material variances identified. Income, Assessments & Housing Expenditure 467 467 0 Income (1,207) (1,207) 0 Net (740) (740) 0 No material variances identified. Highways & Transport Expenditure 7,853 7,853 0 Income (3,473) (3,473) 0 Net 4,379 4,379 0 No material variances identified. Housing Needs and Benefits - PS Expenditure 912 912 0 Income (447) (447) 0 Net 466 466 0 No material variances identified.
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges 26,574 26,574 0
Internal and Capital Charges 8,577 8,577 0
Total 35,151 35,151 0 Appendix B REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
GENERAL FUND - CARRY FORWARDS
Carry Comments Forwards £,000
Adult Social Services 0 No carry forwards identified at present.
Chief Executives 0 No carry forwards identified at present. 51 Children's Services 0 No carry forwards identified at present.
Corporate Services 0 No carry forwards identified at present.
Customer and Localities Services 0 No carry forwards identified at present.
Carry Forwards Total 0
Appendix C REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
STATEMENT OF GENERAL FUND BALANCE
£,000 £,000
General Fund Balance (as at 31/3/2018) (9,124)
Special Items
18/19 Special Items - One off expenditure 2,738 18/19 Special Items - One off income (2,898) (160)
Supplementary Estimates
People Services - Council Tax Exemption for Care Leavers (Mar '18 Exec) 66 Chief Executive - Revised salary range for Chief Exec post (Jul '18 Exec) 16 People Services - Restructing of Tier 2 in People Services (Jul '18 Exec) 68 150
Carry Forwards from 2017/18
Adult Social Services 163 Chief Executive 273 Children's Services 96 Corporate Services 25 Customer and Localities Services 1,042 1,599
Service Variance (including 19/20 carry forwards requests)
Adult Social Services 800 Chief Executive 0 Children's Services 996 Corporate Services 75 Customer and Localities Services 0 1,871
General Fund Balance 31/3/2019 (5,665)
52 Appendix D REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018 HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT Director: G Ebers Executive Member for Housing - Pauline Jorgensen
End of Year Position Current Current Provisional Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Service Approved Forecast Variance Budget
£,000 £,000 £,000
Rents Expenditure 378 378 0 Income (14,847) (14,847) 0 Net (14,469) (14,469) 0 No material variances identified.
Fees & Charges / Capital Finance Expenditure 97 97 0 Charges Income (125) (125) 0
53 Net (28) (28) 0 No material variances identified.
Housing Repairs Expenditure 2,772 2,772 0 Income (30) (30) 0 Net 2,742 2,742 0 No material variances identified.
General Management Expenditure 627 595 (32) Income 0 0 0 Net 627 595 (32) Small underspend due to staffing vacancies.
Sheltered Accommodation Expenditure 648 725 76 Income (409) (409) 0 Net 240 316 76 Staffing pressures within services.
Other Special Expenses Expenditure 151 158 7 Income 0 0 0 Net 151 158 7 No material variances identified.
Capital Finance Expenditure 6,617 6,617 0 Income (36) (36) 0 Net 6,581 6,581 0 No material variances identified.
Subtotal Excluding Internal and Capital Charges (4,156) (4,105) 52
Internal and Capital Charges 4,156 4,156 0 Total 0 52 52 Appendix E REVENUE MONITORING REPORT September 2018
SCHOOLS BLOCK MONITORING REPORT
Director: J Leivers Executive Member, Children's Services: Pauline Helliar-Symons
End of Year Position Current Current Net Over / Approved Forecast (Under) Comment on major areas of estimated over / (underspend) Budget Spend
£,000 £,000 £,000 Schools Block
Schools block including academies (excluding De- 97,349 97,349 0 No material variances identified. This budget relates to the WBC passporting 100% delegation) grant to individual schools.
Early years 11,063 11,063 0 No material variances identified. This budget relates to WBC passporting 96% of grant to early years providers and 4% a contribution to early year services.
High needs block 18,083 19,232 1,149 An increasing proportion of SEN pupils with Social, Emotional & Mental Health and those with Autistic Spectrum Disorder has contributed to the need for costly out of 54 borough placements and independent special schools ISS). Increase in places in our maintained Special school to help reduce the need for ISS.
Central Schools Services block includes the Growth fund 1,744 1,867 123 No provision made in 18/19 in relation to copywrite licences that the DfE pay for and reclaim back from the local authority. Provision will be made in 19-20.
De-delegation services 1,393 1,400 7 Expected to spend the additional underspend of £7k inc. in C\fwd below.
Other schools grant 7,293 7,293 0 No material variances identified.
Total Schools Budget Expenditure 136,925 138,204 1,279
Dedicated School Grant (DSG) (129,633) (129,579) 54 Reduction in income due to additional places commissioned to Post 16 colleges outside of the borough.
Other school Grants (7,293) (7,293) 0 No material variances identified.
Total Schools Block Income (136,925) (136,871) 54
Total in-year over / (under) spend 0 1,333 1,333
Brought forward (surplus) / deficit balance 0 520 520 Brought forward deficit from 17/18. C\FWD De-del income incl. here.
Total 0 1,853 1,853 Agenda Item 66.
TITLE Capital Monitoring 2018/19 - end of September 2018
FOR CONSIDERATION BY The Executive on Thursday, 25 October 2018
WARD None Specific;
DIRECTOR Director of Corporate Services - Graham Ebers
LEAD MEMBER Charlotte Haitham Taylor, Leader of Council
PURPOSE OF REPORT (INC STRATEGIC OUTCOMES)
Effective use of our capital resources to meet service investment priorities, offering excellent value for residents’ council tax.
RECOMMENDATION
The Executive is asked to:
1) note the quarter two position for the capital budget as set out in Appendix A to the report;
2) approve and note that the overall value of the 2018/19 capital programme budget now includes the final part of the previously agreed ring-fenced capital contribution, for £200k increased contingency match- funding contribution from Wokingham Town Council for the Wokingham Town Centre Improvements capital budget. 3) approve and note that the overall value of the 2018/19 capital programme budget now includes £164k S106 contributions for sports facilities to increase the capital budget for the Bulmershe Sports Centre.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To consider the 2018/19 Capital Monitoring Report to the end of September 2018. Executive agreed to consider Capital Monitoring Reports on a quarterly basis. This report is to the end of the 2nd quarter, and shows a nil variance forecast against budget.
55 BACKGROUND
The forecast variance has been arrived at by analysing the actual commitments to date and assessing how expenditure may continue to the end of the year based on the latest information available.
The current approved Capital Budget for the year 1 is £134,011k. It is now estimated that £135,502k will be spent this financial year. The remaining budget of £86,722k will be carried forward into 2019/20.
Analysis of Issues
Effective monitoring of budgets is an essential element of providing cost effective services and enables any corrective action to be undertaken, if required.
Uncommitted Capital balances (capital resources received, but not yet allocated to the capital programme) are currently estimated to be £0.5m as at 30th September 2018 (prior to any announcement about funding cuts and on the assumption that the level of capital receipts will be achieved). The estimated capital receipts received for 2018-19 are expected to be £2m.
Ring Fenced Capital Contributions-
We have been notified of the following ring fenced capital contribution to be received by the Council in 2018/19:-
Contribution for the Town Centre Improvements project from Wokingham Town Council for £200k, being their part of match funding agreement.
S106 Contribution reallocated to Bulmershe Sports Centre to increase budget by £164k, due to additional contamination having been identified during demolition below ground which will require additional mitigation, and requires supplementary funding in excess of approved budget.
These ring fenced grants and contributions are to be added to the capital programme, and must be spent in accordance with the specific activities required by the grant or contribution, or would otherwise need to be returned to the government, or third party.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE RECOMMENDATION The Council faces severe financial challenges over the coming years as a result of the austerity measures implemented by the Government and subsequent reductions to public sector funding. It is estimated that Wokingham Borough Council will be required to make budget reductions in excess of £20m over the next three years and all Executive decisions should be made in this context.
How much will it Is there sufficient Revenue or Cost/ (Save) funding – if not Capital? quantify the Shortfall Current Financial £135,502k Yes Capital Year (Year 1) Next Financial Year £86,722k Yes Capital (Year 2) 56 Following Financial Year (Year 3)
Other Financial Information None
Stakeholder Considerations and Consultation Stakeholders should be reassured of the effective management of the Council’s resources.
Resourcing and Timeline for Next Steps Update will be provided for quarter 3 at January 2019 Executive.
Timeline for Review and Evaluation Reports are reviewed on a monthly basis by CLT and are reported to Executive at the next quarter.
List of Background Papers See attached Appendix A, Capital Monitoring Summary Report to September 2018
Contact James Sandford Service Business Services Telephone Tel: 0118 974 6577 Email [email protected]
57 This page is intentionally left blank Capital Summary Report to End of September 2018
Proposed Full Year Forecast Carry Estimated Budget Profile Year Profile Year Outturn Forward (Under)/ Total Works 2018/19 1 2 2018/19 2019/20 Overspend Complete Service £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Comments
Explanations of Carry Forward: Previous month's total was £(1,520). Current month material Chief Executive 85,860 48,867 36,993 50,386 (1,519) (0) 13,644 adjustments are zero Explanations of variances: No material variances Explanations of Carry Forward: Previous month's total was zero. Current month material Corporate Services 53,079 28,667 24,412 28,667 0 (0) 5,134 adjustments are zero Explanations of variances: No material variances Explanations of Carry Forward: Previous month's total was zero. Current month material adjustments are zero Explanations of variances: Ryeish Green Sports Hub - investigating forecast overspend as a result of unexpected additional utilities costs and difficulties in achieving the identified value Locality & Customer Services 63,879 43,393 20,486 43,393 0 (0) 10,914 engineering savings – proposal is that £118k contingency be reinstated to the project leaving a £250k overspend, to be funded from additional s106 funding identified from the South of the M4 SDL
Explanations of Carry Forward: Previous month's total was zero. Current month material 18,399 12,395 6,004 12,395 0 (0) 4,185
59 Children's Services adjustments are zero Explanations of variances: No material variances Explanations of Carry Forward: Previous month's total was zero. Current month material Adult Services 1,008 689 319 661 28 0 0 adjustments are zero Explanations of variances: No material variances
Grand Total 222,225 134,011 88,213 135,502 (1,491) (0) 33,877
Please note when a negative number is shown in the Proposed Carry Forward this shows that the schemes expenditure has accelerated from the original profile of spend This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 67.
TITLE Local Plan Update (LPU) Towards our Strategy Consultation
FOR CONSIDERATION BY The Executive on Thursday, 25 October 2018
WARD None specific
DIRECTOR Director of Corporate Services - Graham Ebers, Director of Locality and Customer Services - Sarah Hollamby
LEAD MEMBER Executive Member for Business, Economic Development and Strategic Planning - Stuart Munro
PURPOSE OF REPORT (INC STRATEGIC OUTCOMES)
The Local Plan Update (LPU) will provide a robust strategy for managing development to ensure that it occurs in suitable and sustainable locations and that it is deliverable, well-designed, helping to regenerate towns and villages within the borough, support social and economic prosperity, whilst encouraging economic growth.
This report seeks approval to undertake public consultation to assist the development of the Local Plan Update, specifically inviting views on the role of different places across the borough and inviting comments on the land that has been promoted by landowners and developers as being available for development.
Through this engagement, the views of residents and local businesses can be taken into account alongside government requirements and technical evidence when future decisions are made on the preferred strategy for the Local Plan Update.
The report also recommends the adoption of an updated Local Development Scheme, the programme for preparing Local Plans.
RECOMMENDATION
The Executive is advised to:
1) approve 'Local Plan Update: Towards our strategy' for consultation, including supporting engagement activities;
2) authorise the Director of Corporate Services and Director Locality and Customer Services, in consultation with the Executive Member for Business, Economic Development and Strategic Planning, to agree minor amendments, if necessary, prior to consultation;
3) adopt the Local Development Scheme 2018.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Local Plans are the key documents through which local planning authorities can set out a vision and framework for the management of future development.
61 The Local Plan Update will review and put in place up-to-date planning policies seeking to cover the period to 2036. When completed, it will replace the council’s current principal planning strategies the Core Strategy and the Managing Development Delivery documents both of which look to the year 2026.
This report seeks approval to undertake public consultation to assist the development of the Local Plan Update, specifically inviting views in the role of different places across the borough and inviting comment on land that has been promoted by landowners and developers as being available for development. The report also seeks approval to update the programme for preparing the Local Plan Update, and other plans, known as the Local Development Scheme.
62 BACKGROUND
Local Plans are the key documents through which local planning authorities can set out a vision and framework for the management of future development.
The council’s current planning policies are set out in the Core Strategy (adopted 2010) and Managing Development Delivery (adopted 2014) plans.1 Notwithstanding the relatively recent adoption of these plans, changes to national planning policy and guidance necessitate their review.
The Local Plan Update will review and put in place up-to-date planning policies seeking to cover the period to 2036. When completed, it will replace both the Core Strategy and the Managing Development Delivery documents both of which look to the year 2026.2
This report seeks approval to undertake consultation to assist the development of the Local Plan Update, specifically inviting views in the role of different places across the borough and inviting comment on land that has been promoted by landowners and developers as being available for development. The report also seeks approval to update the programme for preparing the Local Plan Update, and other plans, known as the Local Development Scheme.
Analysis of Issues
The big challenge for the Local Plan Update is how to achieve high quality and sustainability whilst providing for new infrastructure, new jobs and new homes.
At the outset it is important to note that the strategy for the Local Plan Update must be deliverable. Options which are not supported by evidence will not succeed when tested at examination by an independent Planning Inspector.
The central aspect of the Local Plan Update is the spatial strategy. This will set out the answers to the three questions: 1. How much development is required? 2. Where should it go? 3. Where shouldn’t it go?
At this stage we do not know and have not committed to any particular approach to managing development or sites that might be allocated to provide new jobs, new homes or other types of development, with activity focused on gathering the necessary information and views to support a decision at a future time.
Key inputs into the local plan process are the consideration of what land may be available for new housing, jobs and other uses such as leisure development, and how development should be managed in different places (e.g. town centres, towns, villages etc.).
Land promoted by landowners/developers
1 Separate plans sets out planning policies for minerals and waste development. 2 A separate process will review both the minerals and waste plans. This work is being undertaken jointly with Bracknell Forest Council, Reading Borough Council, the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and West Berkshire Council. 63 The council made an open invitation for anyone to promote land that may be suitable for development through the ‘call for sites’ exercises in 2016. Through these exercises, and in the subsequent time around 280 sites across Wokingham Borough have been promoted by landowner or developers. Details of promoted land are available on the council’s website.3
The council must follow the process set out in legislation and government planning policy in the Local Plan Process. All promoted land will be assessed for their suitability, availability and achievability (deliverability).
To ensure the council has the best available information, various technical studies have or are being undertaken on a wider range of matters. These include studies considering landscape character, water infrastructure capacity, Green Belt, flood risk, and retail, economic and housing needs. To assist with the analysis of larger and more complex areas of land, consultants were engaged to gather holistic evidence of the constraints and opportunities these areas present, including viability given the greater infrastructure demand requirements. Undertaking specific analysis of larger areas of land does not mean these are any more or less likely to be proposed for development. It simply reflects a sensible way of gathering evidence.
Technical evidence will continue to be evolved as the Local Plan Update process continues, and the preferred approach to managing development is defined.
Management of development across different places
Another key consideration is how development is managed in different places. Generally, areas which benefit from a wider and larger range of services and facilities are more sustainable in terms of minimising the need to travel in particular, and being able to travel by more sustainable methods, e.g. walking and cycling.
As part of our future decision on how best to manage development, we will need to consider the contribution such areas can make to meeting our needs. By way of illustration, to what extent should higher development densities be sought in town centres compared to surrounding sub-urban areas? Or how far should development be directed towards more sustainable towns and villages which have better access to local services and facilities?
The council’s approach under the current Core Strategy seeks to focus the majority of development in the four Strategic Development Locations, with a lesser level of development supported within towns and villages subject to consideration of accessibility and impacts. Back land development and the inappropriate building on residential gardens is specifically resisted. This approach means that the council manages the location and rate of development and has enabled significant new infrastructure to be delivered alongside to help mitigate impacts and to try to alleviate pressure on other areas.
Consultation
Through the recommended public engagement, the view of residents and local representative organisations such as parish and town councils will be sought on the
3 See ‘Call for sites update’ on the Local Plan Update webpage. 64 roles of places across the borough and the promoted land. This allows local opinion to be taken into account alongside government requirements and technical evidence when making future decisions on the preferred strategy for the Local Plan Update.
The consultation presents an overview of the information gathered from our technical studies to assist the submission of informed responses. The full technical studies will be published as background evidence alongside.
It is recommended consultation be undertaken from Monday 12 November until Friday 15 February, a period of over 13 weeks. The extended period reflects the Christmas holiday period. The consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement. A copy of the recommended consultation document is provided in Appendix B.
Future programme
The government requires that all local planning authorities produce a Local Development Scheme (LDS) which is a public statement of the councils programme for the production of Local Plans.
Since the publication of the last LDS in July 2016, there has been a change in circumstances, resulting in the need to revise the LDS. This includes agreement to prepare a joint minerals and waste Local Plan with Bracknell Forest Council, Reading Borough Council, and the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead; and a re- evaluation of the Local Plan Update programme in light of the amount of promoted land and changes in government planning policy.
The recommended programme now envisages consultation on a draft Local Plan in autumn 2019, with pre-submission publication towards the summer 2020. The detailed LDS is provided in Appendix A.
Other Options Considered
There is no realistic alternative option that could be considered for taking the Local Plan Update forward to adoption. The only other option now available is not to progress the plan any further. This is not recommended.
Risk Management
The main risk is whether the Local Plan Update is ultimately found to be ‘legally compliant’ and ‘sound’ by a Planning Inspector who will conduct an independent public examination. This consultation ensures the plan making process continues to progress, and is informed by the views of all interested parties.
Legal Compliance
In producing the Local Plan Update, the council has to assess whether the document is compatible with the legal requirements associated with plans of the council. This includes the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004), the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2012; the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010; the Human Rights Act; compliance with
65 Directives of the European Commission and subsequent UK Regulations and ensuring that no segment of the Borough’s community is likely to be unfairly penalised.
BUSINESS CASE (Including Options and Evidence of Need)
The preparation of a local plan is a statutory requirement under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004), with the process governed by statutes and government guidance. The government’s revised National Planning Policy Framework, published July 2018, requires local plans to up reviewed every five years. With the Core Strategy adopted in 2010, the council is obliged to update its planning policies.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE RECOMMENDATION The Council faces severe financial challenges over the coming years as a result of the austerity measures implemented by the Government and subsequent reductions to public sector funding. It is estimated that Wokingham Borough Council will be required to make budget reductions in excess of £20m over the next three years and all Executive decisions should be made in this context.
How much will it Is there sufficient Revenue or Cost/ (Save) funding – if not Capital? quantify the Shortfall Current Financial Circa 308k Costs total costs for Revenue Year (Year 1) producing the LPU Next Financial Year Circa 306k will be met from the (Year 2) existing multi-year Following Financial Circa 295k budget. Year (Year 3)
Other Financial Information The table above sets out the project costs associated with producing the Local Plan Update as whole. The recommended engagement forms only part of this overall cost. Key costs include the preparation of technical evidence base on such matters as highway impact, and the costs of the examination process itself which is governed by the Planning Inspectorate.
This is a multi-year project and therefore the costs will be spread across a number of financial years, the exact timing of which will be subject to external influences such as the Planning Inspectorate’s availability for the examination. The profile of the budget may vary according to other factors but can be covered by existing agreed budgets.
Stakeholder Considerations and Consultation Consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) and include press notices, public events, and email notifications.
Resourcing and Timeline for Next Steps As set out in the Local Development Scheme, it is anticipated that a Draft Plan will be brought to Executive for consideration in autumn 2019. The Draft Plan would set out the
66 Council’s preferred spatial strategy and list of proposed sites, in addition to draft planning policies to guide future development.
Timeline for Review and Evaluation None.
List of Background Papers Appendix A: Draft Local Development Scheme (LDS) Appendix B: Draft LPU Consultation document
Evidence documents available on the website during the consultation, including: LPU Issues and Options Consultation (2016) Wokingham Strategic Growth Locations. Growth Scenarios Report: Grazeley, Barkham Square, Twyford/Ruscombe. Wokingham Strategic Growth Locations. Growth Scenarios Report: Hall Farm and Ashridge Settlement Hierarchy Assessment
Contact Ian Church Service Place Commissioning Telephone Tel: 0118 974 6450 Email [email protected]
67 This page is intentionally left blank Local Development Scheme October 2018
TIMETABLE (LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME) SETTING OUT WHAT LOCAL PLANS ARE BEING PRODUCED BY THE AUTHORITY
2018 to 2021
69 70 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
CONTENTS
SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2 What is a Local Development Scheme (LDS)? 2 Why is the LDS being amended? 2
2.0 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANS 3 What Local Plans are to be produced? 3 What process do Local Plans have to go through? 3 What is the timetable for the preparation of the Local Plans? 6
3.0 Other plans 8 Neighbourhood Plans 8 Supplementary Plans 8
71 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
SUMMARY
The government requires that all local planning authorities produce a Local Development Scheme (LDS) which is a public statement of the councils programme for the production of Local Plans. Local Plans are very important as they are the key document through which the council sets the vison and framework for the management of future development. As such they form the starting point for making decisions on planning applications.
What Local Plans are being produced?
Between 2018 and 2022 the following Local Plans will be produced: 1. Local Plan Update 2. Minerals and Waste Local Plan
Both plans will be reflected on changes to the policies Map.
The table below summarises the timetable for future stages in the preparation of each plan. There will be opportunities for engagement at key stages.
Stage Minerals and Waste Local Plan Local Plan Update
Draft Plan Consultation August - October 2018 Autumn 2019
Consultation on January – May 2019 Summer 2020 Proposed Submission Document
Submit to Secretary of Winter 2019 Spring 2021 State
Pre Hearing Meeting Spring 2020 Summer 2021
Examination Spring 2020 Summer 2021
Inspector’s Report Summer 2020 Winter 2021/2022 received
Adoption Winter 2020 Spring 2022
72 1 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
What is a Local Development Scheme (LDS)?
1.1 The government requires that all local planning authorities produce a Local Development Scheme (LDS) which is a public statement of the councils programme for the production of Local Plans. Local Plans are very important as they are the key document through which the council sets the vison and framework for the management of future development. As such they form the starting point for making decisions on planning applications.
1.2 This LDS sets out: The Local Plans the council aims to produce; and The programme for producing them, including when public consultation is likely to take place and other key stages.
1.3 This LDS covers the period 2018 to 2021.
1.4 Copies of this LDS can be viewed/found at: Via http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/planning- policy-supporting-information/ The Council’s office at Shute End, Wokingham.
Why is the LDS being amended?
1.5 Since the publication of the last LDS in July 2016, there have been a change in circumstances which have resulted in the need to revise the LDS. These are outlined below.
Re-evaluation of previously approved timetable
1.6 An Local Plan Update Issues and Options consultation was undertaken over the summer 2016. The primary purpose of this consultation was to get an understanding from residents, businesses and other people on what the Local Plan Update should cover as well as how some issues might be approached.
1.7 A key message was the importance of infrastructure. With a larger number of sites promoted by landowners for potential development, additional time is required to gather necessary information and undertake a robust assessment of options. The next stage of the Local Plan Update, the Spatial Options, will provide the opportunity for the public/stakeholders to comment on the large number of sites that have been submitted.
Agreement of the joint planning for minerals and waste
1.8 The local planning authorities Bracknell Forest Council, Reading Borough Council, the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham Borough Council have agreed and are working to prepare a joint minerals and waste plan. The update reflects the agreed timetable.
If I need further information about the LDS, who should I contact?
1.9 Further advice on this LDS or other planning policy documents can be obtained from the Council’s Growth and Delivery Team on (0118) 974 6478 or email [email protected]. You can find more out about the Local Plans by going to http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/
73 2 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
2.0 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANS
What Local Plans are to be produced?
2.1 Between 2018 and 2021 the following Local Plans will be produced: 1. Local Plan Update 2. Minerals and Waste Local Plan
Local Plan Update
2.2 The Local Plan Update will review and put in place up-to-date planning policies for non-minerals and waste development, up to 2036. Upon completion it will replace the current Core Strategy and Managing Development Delivery plans which cover the period to 2026.
2.3 The Local Plan Update will cover a wide range of matters. A key area will be assessing the future development needs for new homes, employment land and other uses such as accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers. It will then set a strategy for delivery including allocating key sites as necessary.
Minerals and Waste Local Plan
2.4 The Central and Eastern Berkshire Joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan will review and put in place up-to-date planning policies for minerals and waste development. The plan is being produced jointly by the local planning authorities of Bracknell Forest Council, Reading Borough Council, the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, and Wokingham Borough Council. The authorities have commissioned Hampshire Services of Hampshire County Council, to prepare the plan.
2.5 The plan will identify the approach to the delivery of minerals and the treatment of waste and will allocate sites for such uses. Upon completion it will replace all the saved policies in the Replacement Minerals Local Plan1 and Waste Local Plan for Berkshire2.
Policies Map
2.6 The Policies Map spatially illustrates the policies on an Ordnance Survey base map. It will be updated to reflect any area specific policies in as Local Plans are adopted (completed). The Policies Map will shows matters such as: local development constraints, e.g. Green Belt; designations, e.g. development limits (outside of which it would be difficult for example to get planning permission for a new housing site); site allocations, e.g. sites may be allocated for housing, employment, etc.
What process do Local Plans have to go through?
2.7 Local Plans are prepared in accordance with a regulatory process. The process includes consultation with the community and stakeholders. Following its preparation, a Local Plan is subject to examination by an independent Planning Inspector.
2.8 The four main stages in the preparation of a Local Plan are:
1 Adopted in 1995 and subsequently adopted alterations in 1997 and 2001 (including Appendices and saved policies) 2 Adopted in 1998 (including saved policies) 74 3 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
1. The pre-production stage, including evidence gathering by the council on key issues and development options, and consulting statutory bodies on the scope of the sustainability appraisal.
2. The production stage, including public and stakeholder consultation by the council on the development issues and options, and the scope of the Local Plan and the consideration of consultation responses.
3. The submission and examination stage, where the Local Plan will be submitted to the Secretary of State the subject to scrutiny by an independent Planning Inspector who will assess it for its the legal compliance and soundness.
4. Finally, the adoption stage, where the Local Plan formally becomes part of the development plan.
2.9 These stages are further explained in Figure 1 below. Consultation with different groups is guided by the council’s Statement of Community Involvement
75 4 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
Figure 1: Local Plan Process
Public engagement stages
Evidence Gathering
Early stakeholder and community engagement
Develop options based on issues and evidence gathered
Consultation on Issues and Options* document
Consultation on Spatial Options document
Develop Draft Plan based on consultation comments and further evidence bases.
Consultation on Draft Plan* document
Document Production & Examination
Develop and produce proposed submission document
Consultation on proposed submission document
Review comments and revise submission document
Submit to Secretary of State - Planning Inspector appointed
Public Examination by Planning Inspector
Report received from Planning Inspector
Document Adopted (Completed)
76 5 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
* These stages can be undertaken as two separate stages (Issues & Options and Preferred Options) or as one Draft Options Stage
What is the timetable for the preparation of the Local Plans?
2.10 Figure 2 below summarises the key stages for the preparation of the Local Plans.
Figure 1 Purpose, stages and dates for producing Local Plans (2016 to 2022) Stage Purpose of Stage Minerals and Local Plan Update Waste Local Plan Early Early evidence gathering June 2016 (start) Oct 2015 (start) Stakeholder & stage, which may include Community the public and relevant Engagement stakeholders. This produces an evidence base from which to form policies Scoping Consultation on what Sep 2016 – Mar Nov – Dec 2015 Report sustainability objectives 2017 consultation (social, economic and environmental) should be used to assess whether the Local Plan is sustainable Issues & Consultation stage giving Mar - Sep 2017 Aug – Sep 2016 Options the public/stakeholders a Consultation + first opportunity to shape proposed options and identify issues. Spatial Consultation stage giving November – Options the public/stakeholders the January 2018 consultation opportunity to comment on all the sites promoted to the council for future development Draft Plan Further consultation stage, August - October Autumn 2019 consultation + taking account of 2018 comments made at earlier (Issues & Options) stage (if required), which will set out the preferred options.
At this stage evidence is still being gathered, and this is the first opportunity for the public/stakeholders to respond to the content of the plan, including proposed site allocations. The Plan can still be changed after this stage. Consultation This takes account of January – May Summer 2020 on Proposed comments made at the 2019 Submission earlier Draft Plan stage. Document 77 6 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
Stage Purpose of Stage Minerals and Local Plan Update Waste Local Plan Consultation on proposed submission document; allowing the public/stakeholders to review and comment on its justification, effectiveness, consistency with national policy and whether it meets its development and infrastructure requirements. Submit to Document submitted to the Winter 2019 Spring 2021 Secretary of Secretary of State who State# appoints Planning Inspector to oversee public examination. Pre Hearing Planning Inspector decides Spring 2020 Summer 2021 Meeting* whether a pre hearing meeting is required. Examination Planning Inspector holds Spring 2020 Summer 2021 public hearings to examine whether the document is “sound” (see paragraph 35 of National Planning Policy Framework.)There is an opportunity for those who commented at the proposed submission stage to present their views/suggested changes at the hearings. Date depends on whether Planning Inspectorate consider that a pre hearing meeting is necessary Inspector’s Report received stating Summer 2020 Winter 2021/22 Report whether document is received~ “sound.” Adoption Document is officially Winter 2020 Spring 2022 adopted and becomes policy.
^ Saved policies are those which are still used to determine planning applications following the decision of the Secretary of State on 24/9/07 # Assumes that only minor changes, i.e. typographical changes are needed following consultation on the Proposed Submission document *The Planning Inspectorate usually decides whether a Pre-Hearing meeting is needed. This could affect timing of subsequent stages. ~Assumes no further consultation on main modifications necessary following examination hearings +These stages can be undertaken as two separate stages (Issues & Options and Preferred Options) or as one Draft Options Stage.
78 7 Local Development Scheme (2018 - 2021)
3.0 OTHER PLANS
Neighbourhood Development Plans
3.1 Parish and Town Councils can now prepare Neighbourhood Development Plans (NDP) and/or Orders. The production of a NDP or Order has to be instigated by the relevant Parish or Town Council and does not form part of this LDS which reflects council plans.
3.2 Once adopted, NDPs form part of the development plan.
3.3 Any NDP must be in general conformity with ‘strategic policies’ in the Local Plan and with Government policy. NDPs are not able to propose lower levels of development than those set out in up to date Local Plans but could propose higher levels. Before an NDP is adopted it must be subject to a referendum. If over 50% of the votes are in favour the local planning authority would have a duty to adopt the NDP unless it does not meet regulations. Further information on neighbourhood planning can be found via http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning-and-building- control/planning-policy/key-planning-documents/neighbourhood-planning/
3.4 Within WBC there is currently one completed NPD for Shinfield Parish. A number of other NDPs are being worked on by Parish Councils. Further information is available on the website: http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/neighbourhood-planning/
Supplementary Plans
3.5 Supplementary Planning Documents and other forms of supplementary guidance provide more advice to explain the policies and proposals set out in the Local Plan. Unlike Local Plans, their preparation of not subject to examination, however consultation is a key element of their preparation.
79 8 This page is intentionally left blank WOKINGHAM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN UPDATE ‘Shaping our Future’ 81
'TOWARDS OUR STRATEGY' CONSULTATION DOCUMENT NOV 2018 - FEB 2019
»www.wokingham.gov.uk/localplanupdate Contents 1 Introduction ...... 3 Introduction ...... 3 What is this consultation about? ...... 3 What is a Local Plan? ...... 3 How will the Local Plan Update be used? ...... 4 Why is the Local Plan being prepared now? ...... 4 What if we didn’t update the Local Plan? ...... 4 How do I get involved? ...... 7 What happens next? ...... 7 What else are we doing? ...... 8
82 2 Where is Wokingham Borough? (The Spatial Portrait) ...... 10 3 Consultation Context...... 12 Why is more housing needed? ...... 12 So, how many homes are needed? ...... 12 What have we learned so far? ...... 13 It’s not just about housing ...... 14 What land has been promoted for potential development? ...... 14 What you have told us so far? ...... 15 4 Role of Places ...... 16 Places in Wokingham Borough ...... 16 Concentrating or dispersing new housing ...... 16 Higher development densities and building heights ...... 19
1
Concentrating employment on existing or new sites...... 21 5 Role of Promoted Land ...... 23 Urban Western Area ...... 25 Wokingham Area ...... 29 South Western Area ...... 32 South Eastern Area ...... 36 Northern Area ...... 39 Appendix A – Frequently Asked Questions ...... 42 Appendix B – Schedule of Promoted Land – Urban western area ...... 45 Appendix C – Schedule of Promoted Land – Wokingham area ...... 47 Appendix D – Schedule of Promoted Land – South western area ...... 49 83 Appendix E – Schedule of Promoted Land – South Eastern area ...... 58 Appendix F – Schedule of Promoted Land – Northern area ...... 64
2
1 Introduction
Introduction 1.1 This paper is the second public consultation for the Local Plan Update, and forms 84 part of the initial options engagement stage in the plan making process. What is this consultation about? 1.2 This consultation is about seeking people’s views on producing a Local Plan Update (LPU) for Wokingham Borough and follows on from the previous Issues & Options consultation. We are seeking views on areas of land that have been promoted by landowners and developers as available for new housing, jobs and other uses. No decisions have been made yet and we value your input in the process. This consultation takes us one step closer to this decision by seeking the views and local knowledge of residents, local businesses, landowners’ and others on the key issue of how development should be managed in different places across the borough, for example town centres, towns and villages.
What is a Local Plan? 1.3 Local Plans are the key documents through which the Borough Council manages the growth pressures for our communities and sets out where new homes, jobs and other types of development should go.
3
How will the Local Plan Update be used? 1.4 In England, there is a ‘plan-led’ system, which means that the local plan will provide the framework from which day to day decisions on planning applications are made and also guide infrastructure investment. We know if we do not manage growth pressures the development comes anyway. Work is therefore underway to update our Local Plan. The decisions we make are important to us all. As such, we want you to join the conversation and have your say. Even if you don’t want any development, knowing that it will come anyway, this is your opportunity to shape it and suggest supporting infrastructure.
Why is the Local Plan being prepared now? 1.5 Our current Local Plan goes from 2006 – 2026, but it is important that we roll the plan forward to plan for the future. This ensures the needs of residents and local businesses are properly addressed and planned for in a coordinated way and those important areas and features of the borough’s environment we wish to preserve are
85 protected. This is the best way to help deliver development that is sustainable. 1.6 An up-to-date Local Plan provides greater certainty as to where development will occur (with the accompanying infrastructure) and where it won’t. Without such a plan, What is a planning appeal? there is less control over where development comes forward, with the right infrastructure to meet our needs, and we are less able to do things like negotiate with bus operators to A planning application refused provide new bus routes for existing and new residents. It is much harder to invest in by the council can be appealed, whereby an improvements to infrastructure such as roads and schools if development is driven by independent planning developers in an ad-hoc and dispersed pattern. inspector reviews the case and makes their decision What if we didn’t update the Local Plan? 1.7 Legally, when you don’t have a local plan or an up to date plan, there is a presumption in favour of development which would be an open door for developers to get planning permission via the planning appeals process. Rather than new housing going in the areas where we want them to go, appeal decisions would allow housing in the areas that developers wish them to go, Without an up-to-date plan there would be no defendable limit to the amount of houses built. Appeals will divert the council time into defending ourselves on appeal rather than managing growth in a proactive way.
4
Table 1: Planned Development v. Unplanned Development
Planned Development Unplanned Development What Will Happen What This Means For You What Will Happen What This Means For You Democratically accountable councillors You can influence where and how the There would be no local control or real You will have no say at all in over make decisions on where and how new homes are built to meet our influence over where or how the where the new housing is built. homes are built following consultation needs. housing is built. The housing will People living near you would be more with local people. This will be agreed in come anyway, but it will either come likely to sell off their back garden a document called a Local Plan. through a plan imposed by Government or a free-for-all of planning applications from developers what we won’t be able to successfully refuse or restrain overall numbers. We do have to follow national policy We will not pretend this is a We would not know where housing Without planned infrastructure and so do not have complete control. completely free choice. There will be development is going to take place alongside development, there will be differences of opinion, tough decisions and so will not will not be able to plan huge pressure on places in existing and compromises. But the more for its impact. schools, roads and other community people get involved, the better chance facilities. we have to reflect local views. Once it is planned, we will know where New schools; roads and other It would be impossible to fund the By the time we know where these 86 housing is going to be built and so can transport improvements including new infrastructure and facilities needed to pressures are, it would be too late to plan where new infrastructure and bus routes; parks and play areas; and cope with new homes. plan for them and we will not have got facilities are needed. sport, community and health facilities money from developers to pay for can be provided where they are them needed so that the impact on your quality of life is limited. Housing developers can be made to Local taxpayers do not have to pay for pay for the necessary infrastructure the new infrastructure, yet will still and facilities. have access to it. With a plan in place, we have far more We can build infrastructure before chance of making successful bids for many houses have been built so it is Government funding for infrastructure. ready for our new residents. Developers can only be made to fund Some issues, in particular congestion, things related to the development they are getting worse year-on-year whether are building. We cannot get money there is development or not. The from them to fix other problems. money we get from developers cannot change this and we must seek other solutions.
5
The End Result The End Result
The borough will be busier with more people who will drive more cars, need Chaos. The impact is impossible to fully predict – because it will be chaotic – more school places, more GP appointments and more community and sport but just some of the likely effects are: facilities. • Your children may well not be able to get a place in a local school – or perhaps any school in the borough. But these extra needs will be met through new infrastructure so you will • You’ll have even more difficulty to get a GP appointment or other health continue to get school places locally and access to other services. Our Roads service. will continue to be busy but, with the massive investment that properly planned • Our roads will be even more congested – quite possibly reaching gridlock in new homes bring, we will be able to keep the network going. places. • Your local football team, other sports, youth and community clubs will have difficulty finding places to play or meet.
87
6
How do I get involved? 1.8 The consultation runs from Monday 12 November to 4pm on Friday 15 February 2019. 1.9 We welcome everyone being involved in the Local Plan. While the system of planning is complicated, the key messages are simple and we are determined to help as many people join in the conversation about where and how our growth pressures are met as possible. We would like to hear your views on the questions within the consultation. 1.10 You can find all of the documents on the Council’s website at www.wokingham.gov.uk/localplanupdate. Paper copies are also available at the Council’s offices at Shute End. 1.11 If you have access to the internet, you can access the questions online and submit your comments to us directly without having to fill in a separate response form – which will help us save both paper and time. To do this please go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/consultations
88 1.12 If you don’t have access to the internet, or simply prefer to send a paper response, you can print out the accompanying response form from our website or simply write to us with your comments. Please return your completed response forms to us: By email to: [email protected] By post to: Growth & Delivery Team, Wokingham Borough Council, Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham, RG40 1WR 1.13 If you have any questions regarding the consultation, please contact us by emailing [email protected]. What happens next? 1.14 We will consider all comments and views from you through the formal and informal consultation sessions, and use this to inform a strategy for where future development will go. Alongside this we will also draft policies which will determine how development will be managed e.g. what mix of different types of housing will be allowed, how we conserve and enhance our historic buildings etc.
7
1.15 Our thoughts on the development strategy and policies that are needed to manage future development will be presented to you in a ‘draft plan’, which we will seek your views on next year. 1.16 Following that, we will fine-tune the draft plan into a ‘proposed submission’ plan based on the feedback received. ( Figure 1 shows the different stages of the Local Plan process). At this point, the plan’s format and content will be the same as we anticipate submitting to the secretary of state for it to be examined independently. You will still be able to provide your views on the ‘proposed submission’ plan when this is produced later in the process. At this stage your comments will need to be more focused on specific issues of ‘soundness’ and legal compliance – but we will explain this to you when we get to that stage. What else are we doing? 1.17 We are continuing to assess all of the sites promoted to us from a technical
89 perspective. Other pieces of evidence are also being prepared, including, updating the borough wide landscape character assessment, progressing an employment market appraisal and capacity assessment, and preparing a water cycle study. Together, these evidence gathering exercises will inform the draft plan.
8
Public engagement stages
Evidence Gathering Figure 1: Local Plan Process
Early stakeholder and community engagement
Develop options based on issues and evidence gathered
Consultation on Issues and Options document
Consultation on Spatial Options document WE ARE HERE
Develop Draft Plan based on consultation comments and further evidence bases.
Consultation on Draft Plan document
90
Document Production & Examination
Develop and produce proposed submission document
Consultation on proposed submission document
Review comments and revise submission document
Submit to Secretary of State - Planning Inspector appointed
Public Examination by Planning Inspector
Report received from Planning Inspector 9
Document Adopted (Completed) 2 Where is Wokingham Borough? (The Spatial Portrait)
91
Figure 2: Wokingham Borough in Context
10
2.1 Wokingham Borough is located within Berkshire. It is a great place to live, learn and do business with a good quality of life, helped by its excellent access to London and the key airports of Heathrow and Gatwick. It is continually growing, evolving, and diversifying, and plays a key role in the country’s economy as part of the M4 corridor, which has European and international significance, and has numerous large business parks (e.g. Thames Valley Park) which host multi-national companies, 2.2 Wokingham Borough provides high quality high value residential areas set in attractive countryside settings around historic towns and villages. Development pressure in these areas is high due to good employment opportunities, great access to quality housing, education and services. 2.3 Wokingham Borough contains parts of the Metropolitan Green Belt that surrounds London, with approximately 16% of the Borough designated as Green Belt. The five purposes of the Green Belt are set out in paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 2.4 A number of rivers flow through Wokingham Borough meaning some parts are prone to flooding. Other environmental and human constraints that constrain land for development in the Borough include ancient woodland and gas pipelines.
92 2.5 Wokingham Borough adjoins the Boroughs of Wycombe to the north; Windsor & Maidenhead and Bracknell Forest to the east; Hart and Basingstoke & Deane to the south and south west respectively; and West Berkshire, Reading and South Oxfordshire to the west. 2.6 The highly valuable natural environment, wildlife, biodiversity, heritage assets, and multiple country parks of the Borough all contribute to its attractiveness as a place to live, work and visit. 2.7 The population of the Borough at the time of the 2011 census was recorded as 154,380. Wokingham, the administrative centre, is an old market town which retains its character and houses one fifth of the Borough's population. Two fifths of the Borough's population live in the towns of Woodley and Earley which adjoin the Borough of Reading. The remainder of the population live in smaller settlements which are separated by areas of countryside that include extensive flood plains. 2.8 The Borough accommodates a stretch of the M4 motorway that connects London and South Wales and the A329M that connects to Bracknell and Greater Reading. Railway links from Reading to London Paddington and London Waterloo run through the borough, as well as the North Downs line, connecting the borough to Gatwick airport.
11
3 Consultation Context 3.1 The Local Plan cannot be prepared in isolation. It is required to take account of the government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which sets out the government’s overall approach to planning, and the accompanying Planning Practice Guidance which provides more detailed guidance on how the NPPF is implemented. 3.2 It is also clear that our population is growing and that the economy continues to evolve. Whilst predictions vary, all datasets point to more people living and working in the borough regardless of national factors such as Brexit.
Why is more housing needed? 3.3 New housing is a controversial and complex subject. We all want homes for our families and ourselves, and we all recognise that the increasing cost of housing has made it more difficult for young families to find a suitable home. However, let’s be honest, we don’t always want houses built 93 near us. This is not a local issue but is experienced across much of England. The standard method was 3.4 The population of Wokingham Borough is growing. The latest government projections state that introduced with the revised the population of Wokingham Borough will grow by around an average of 811 people or 455 NPPF in July 2018. If you’re households each year between 2018 and 2036. Nearly all local authorities in England are expected interested in finding out more, please look here: to see growth in the population and number of households. For Wokingham Borough the largest single factor influencing the population is natural change, with residents expected to live longer than https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ in the past. housing-and-economic- development-needs- So, how many homes are needed? assessments 3.5 The government has introduced a standard approach of calculating the number of homes each local authority must plan for. This links the number of homes to the projected increase in the number of households. An adjustment is then made to take account of house prices and earnings. The government sees high house prices compared to earnings as evidence that supply has not kept up with demand and will require more homes to be built as a result. 3.6 Using the latest information available, the government expects an average of 752 new homes to be built each year in Wokingham Borough. The government guidance on housing need means that
12
Affordable Housing this figure will change regularly, and until recently the council was required to enable delivery of 850- 900 new homes each year. A definition of affordable 3.7 We have already planned for many of the new homes we require through our existing planning housing can be found in the NPPF here: strategy, the Core Strategy which covers the shorter period to 2026. At 31 March 2018, planning permission had been granted for around 10,000 new homes, some of which are under construction. https://assets.publishing.servi Many of these will count towards our future supply of homes. ce.gov.uk/government/upload s/system/uploads/attachment 3.8 Part of this housing need is for new affordable homes across Wokingham borough, which _data/file/740441/National_P includes affordable housing for rent, key worker housing, and shared ownership. It is recognised that lanning_Policy_Framework_we new houses can be expensive, and out of reach for some prospective buyers, including first time b_accessible_version.pdf#pag buyers. Significant progress has been made to tackle this affordability issue, including the council e=66” setting up its own housing company, Wokingham Housing Limited, to support the delivery of new affordable homes. New affordable housing will be sought on all qualifying sites proposed for future development. Sites will rarely be developed for 100% affordable housing as developers will not make enough profit, meaning the site will be a mix of affordable and private housing. 3.9 We also need to plan for homes for the Gypsy and Traveller community in the form of what is 94 known as pitches. This need is in addition to the 752 new homes. Our identified need is for 90 pitches over the period 2017-2036. At 31 March 2018 planning permission was in place for 15 additional pitches. Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment What have we learned so far?
For more information on the 3.10 As part of our initial assessment a few things have become clear: need assessment for Gypsy The sustainability of our towns and villages vary. Generally, towns and larger and Traveller pitches, see here: villages have better facilities than smaller settlements; however, concentrating http://www.wokingham.gov.uk development in too few places can intensify disruption and limit choice. /planning-policy/planning- To provide all the housing the government thinks we should be providing, we policy/evidence-topics/ cannot rely just on those sites that are in urban areas, or on land that has been built on previously. There simply isn’t enough urban land available that is realistically developable.
13
Based on our previous experience, infrastructure can often best be provided through larger scale development sites. These offer the opportunity to limit local travel by providing new schools and facilities close to new housing. Large sites cannot go it alone. As large sites can take longer to go from the planning stage to completion of homes, other smaller sites can help ensure a consistent supply, something the government places great importance on.
It’s not just about housing 3.11 It is also important that we plan for the continued economic prosperity of the borough. A number of multinational companies are based in the borough, some of which operate from large business Sites have been promoted for: parks, in addition to businesses based in town centres, industrial estates, and increasingly, from 257 for housing residential addresses by the self-employed. It is important to retain these businesses, attract new 17 for business/industry business, and help establish start-ups.
95 15 for leisure or green space 3.12 Similar to housing, work has been undertaken to calculate the future employment needs of the 24 for Gypsy and Traveller borough, which has shown the need for additional floorspace for new jobs, including office, pitches warehousing and industry. Further work is ongoing that will update this need, but it is clear that 9 for shops additional space for new jobs will be needed over the plan period. 7 for restaurants, cafes, pubs
*note some sites have been promoted for multiple What land has been promoted for potential development? uses 3.13 In line with government requirements, the council made an open invitation for anyone to promote locations where land may be suitable and available for development through a ‘call for sites’ in 2016. Since this time, and in the subsequent period, around 280 areas of land have been put forward for a variety of uses by landowners/promoters, including the Council. Whilst many have views about which sites are unacceptable, the task we must do is allocate sites at the end of the process so you are encouraged to say which do and do not meet with your approval. 3.14 We must follow the process set out in government policy when preparing the Local Plan. This includes the assessment of all the promoted land for its suitability, availability and achievability. Sites which have not been promoted will of course be hard to justify as available and achievable. To help us to do this, we would like your views through this consultation. Your views will then be used alongside our technical analysis to help make decisions.
14
3.15 The technical analysis we have undertaken so far is available to you http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning-policy/planning-policy/evidence-topics/. These include Many of the sites suggested studies relating to local services and facilities, flooding, landscape character, Green Belt, water will not be suitable. So just infrastructure capacity, significant vegetation and wildlife corridors, Public Rights of Way, and analysis because we have to consider of some of the larger and more complex areas of land that have been promoted. Undertaking each promoted site, doesn’t specific analysis of the larger areas of land promoted does not mean that these are any more or less mean development will happen. likely to be allocated for development through the Local Plan. It simply reflects a sensible way of gathering evidence to assess all of the land promoted.
What you have told us so far? 3.16 We have previously asked for your views on the scope of the Local Plan and a number of issues, through an ‘Issues and Options’ consultation in 2016. Key messages to emerge from responses include: Respondents favoured using a combination of approaches to meeting development needs. The most supported individual approach was to utilise a
96 small number of larger developments incorporating their own infrastructure and designed with regard to garden settlement principles. Respondents strongly supported the need to provide infrastructure alongside development, and preferably its early provision ahead of when it is needed. Respondents supported the protection of the Green Belt and countryside areas. There was recognition that previously developed sites in these areas might be suitable for redevelopment. Respondents acknowledged the need for some flexibility towards employment to allow adaptation to new ways of working (including technologies) and the growth of non-traditional businesses.
3.17 Further information on your views expressed in the Issues & Options consultation is available on our website at http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/planning-policy/planning-policy/local-plan-update/.
15
4 Role of Places Places in Wokingham Borough 4.1 As part of our future decision on how best to manage development, we will need to consider the contribution different places and areas can make to meeting our needs. For example, to what extent should higher development densities be sought in town centres compared to surrounding suburban areas, or how far should development be directed towards more sustainable towns and villages which have better access to local services and facilities? 4.2 Work has therefore been undertaken to determine which places have access to local services and facilities, such as schools, public transport and sports facilities. This Settlement Hierarchy Assessment, therefore sets out different tiers of settlement. 4.3 Tier 1 settlements consist of towns and large settlements which have a large amount of services and facilities: Arborfield Garrison, Earley, Green Park, Shinfield (South of M4, Three Mile 97 Cross and Spencers Wood), Twyford, Winnersh, Wokingham, Woodley. 4.4 Tier 2 settlements typically have a population of over 1,000 people and which have access to a number of key services and facilities: Pinewood (Crowthorne), Finchampstead North, Ruscombe, Wargrave. 4.5 Tier 3 settlements are less well served by other services and by employment provision and have limited access to public transport: Arborfield Cross, Barkham Hill, Charvil, Finchampstead, Hurst, Riseley, Sindlesham, Sonning, Swallowfield. 4.6 This hierarchy does not determine where development is directed but helps to inform future decisions about places as one part of the wider evidence base of the Local Plan Update.
Concentrating or dispersing new housing 4.7 The council’s current planning approach was generated in response to the late 1990’s tend of ‘garden grabbing’ where infill small plots with little or no infrastructure were appearing all over the district. The response to this ad-hoc form of development concentrated the majority of development
16
in four key areas, called our Strategic Development Locations1 (SDLs). The SDL approach has helped deliver new housing developments alongside necessary infrastructure including new schools, community facilities and transport links, which would not have been provided by unplanned ad hoc development. 4.8 From the work undertaken so far, it is clear that our future need for housing cannot be met entirely from redevelopments within our towns and villages, and from within the existing planned SDLs. As a result there is a need to find suitable new areas for development on the outskirts of existing towns and villages, that are likely to currently be fields. The alternative would be a return to the ad-hoc pattern of development in the 1990’s. It is important to recognise that while developing suitable new areas may result in some loss of areas of countryside, it can conversely have the benefit of improving public access to the countryside by turning inaccessible private fields into public space that all of us can use. 4.9 The question of where this development is directed is crucial. Concentrating development in a small number of locations which each deliver large numbers of housing is one method. Like our existing strategy, this has the benefit of delivering infrastructure like the new roads we need and
98 means that much more infrastructure investment can be funded by developers. Development of this scale takes longer to provide the houses than smaller scale developments. 4.10 High quality homes can also be delivered on smaller sites. These can often be quicker from planning to delivery, but it is harder to provide infrastructure improvements alongside. This means that new residents are likely to drive to do such things as, taking their children to school or going to the park. 4.11 In our ‘lssues and Options’ consultation, the majority of people who responded supported a range of site sizes, whilst supporting the use of larger developments to meet our needs. We would like to expand this further and find out more about your views on how this might work – from where the best opportunities are for larger developments, to how much we could spread development across the borough.
1 More information on these can be found at: http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/major-developments/
17
QUESTION 1a: To what extent should development be met by larger development areas, which are capable of delivering their own infrastructure needs? (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
QUESTION 1b: Where in the borough are the best opportunities to establish new communities (through larger development areas), which include such things as local centres, schools and improved sustainable transport links? You may wish to draw on the information presented in Section 4 of this consultation document. Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
Question 1c: To what extent should the future development needs of homes, jobs and other uses be spread across the whole borough?
99 (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
Question 1d: To what extent should future housing development include affordable (see here for more info) housing? (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
Question 1e: Are there any specific types of affordable (see here for more info) housing you would support?
18
Higher development densities and building heights 4.13 The government’s revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)2 has a strong emphasis on using land as efficiently as possible. This includes building at higher development densities where appropriate. There will be areas in the borough where higher densities are more appropriate than others. Higher density development is best placed in areas with the best access to public transport, services, and jobs meaning there is less need to travel by car on a day to day basis. Increases in density can be achieved without significant changes to the way an area looks by, for example, introducing smaller dwellings which use less land, or a greater proportion of apartment development. 4.14 One way of achieving higher development densities is to build taller buildings. There will be some locations in the borough where building higher, and using the space above existing buildings, may be a suitable approach. Introducing taller buildings into an area would however change the existing character and bring more activity to a local area. This would not necessarily be a problem, but we need to consider the pros and cons of getting the most out of a plot of land against the impacts of doing so. Taller buildings do not always mean high-rise blocks of flats, and increasing density can result in well-designed places that make the best use of the land available. Some may be 100 smaller homes that are often more affordable than larger properties built at lower densities, this allows greater choice and flexibility in the housing market.
2 Which can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2
19
QUESTION 2a: To what extent do you agree with being more flexible with building heights, parking standards and development densities, where a range of shops of other services are within walking distance, such as towns and district centres? (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
QUESTION 2b: Which locations in the borough do you feel are best suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 2c: With regards to your response to question 2b, what types of housing, jobs, or other uses do you think are most suitable in these areas e.g. apartments (low-rise, medium- rise, high-rise), small houses, affordable/council housing, older persons housing, offices, 101 etc.? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
20
Concentrating employment on existing or new sites 4.15 The council’s current approach to employment land - such as office space, warehousing, storage and distribution facilities is that the majority of employment growth within the Borough will occur in specific areas known as Core Employment Areas, like Winnersh Triangle Business Park and Molly Millars Industrial Estate. 4.16 These areas often have the capacity for additional employment floorspace to be delivered by intensifying what is already there. One approach moving forward would be to continue to focus employment growth in areas like this, which would include identifying additional Core Employment Areas such as the Thames Valley Science Park (south of the M4 and northeast of Shinfield) which is currently being delivered. 4.17 Through changes to government policy over recent years, it is now possible for owners of certain employment buildings to change the use of the land to residential without requiring planning approval from the council. This has seen some losses of employment floorspace in our Core Employment Areas to housing. One approach to employment could be to encourage mixed use developments which
102 introduce new areas of employment land alongside housing and other uses, rather than relying on a number of designated core areas that restrict other uses.
21
QUESTION 3a: To what extent do you agree with meeting employment needs in the following locations? (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
i. Town and district centres ii. Existing employment estates and locations iii. Land adjacent to existing employment estates and locations iv. New locations
QUESTION 3b: To what extent do you agree with being more flexible with building heights on existing employment estates to allow more floorspace to be created? (On a scale of 1 – 5, where 1 = least extent, 5 = greatest extent)
103 QUESTION 3c: Which employment areas/locations do you feel are best suited to being more flexible with building heights? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
22
5 Role of Promoted Land
5.1 To successfully enhance and develop the places within our borough, against the backdrop of the nationwide need for more homes, we must look to the land promoted to us to achieve this. The following section shows the land promoted to us, presented through 5 areas of the borough, asking for your views on what opportunities there may be in each area. These areas do not signify that one part of the borough is more likely to be identified for new development than another, but simply serves to help the discussion. 5.2 The majority of the sites have been promoted for housing, but there are also promotions for employment, open space, retail, Gypsy and Traveller, leisure, care homes. Some sites have been promoted for more than one of these. Sites are colour coded depending on the use(s) they have been promoted for.
104
23
Figure 3: Five consultation areas 105
24
Urban Western Area 5.3 This area comprises two of the borough’s larger settlements of Woodley and Earley, along with Winnersh, as well as Shinfield North. Between them the two principal settlements in this area hold two fifths of the Borough’s population per the 2011 Census3 and have access to a good range of services and facilities. 5.4 Good access is available from this area to the greater Southern region of the UK through the M4 corridor via both Junctions 10 and 11. This area additionally benefits from good public transport links, including suburban rail-links from Earley, Winnersh and Winnersh Triangle stations to the major Rail network hub at Reading station through to London Paddington, or directly to London Waterloo and beyond. There are also a large number of bus routes connecting through this area as well as the Winnersh to Reading Park and Ride, accessible via the A329, which provides an additional service to help reduce congestion into Reading. 5.5 The area is largely considered to be Reading facing, with a large number of its economic sites considered as falling into the ‘Greater Reading office market’4. Key employment locations in this area
106 include both Thames Valley Park (TVP) and Winnersh Triangle, which hold notable clusters of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) Industry companies along with specialists in communication and professional service industries. 5.6 The area is mostly built up, which ensures its parks and open space are important.. This is recognised in the existing local plan with the special designation of Sites of Urban Landscape Value (SULV) for Bulmershe, South Lake and Maiden Erlegh Lake. The River Loddon winds through this area from north east to south west and its associated floodplain constrains further development. It is also constrained by the M4 and Reading-Maidenhead-London Paddington rail line to the South and North respectively. As there are limited opportunities for further residential development in the area, the likelihood of an increased adverse effect on the M4 Air Quality Management Area is limited. 5.7 Phase 1 of the Winnersh Relief Road is now open and a public consultation on Phase 2 has recently finished. This relief road will join King Street Lane to Lower Earley Way providing an
3 Issues & Options Consultation Document ‘shaping Our Future’ Wokingham Borough Local Plan Update August 2016 – Page 8, Paragraph 2.7 4 [1] Central Berkshire FEMA Economic Development Needs Assessment - Executive Summary – Page 2 Paragraph1
25
opportunity to alleviate existing congestion, largely on Reading Road, and serve new homes being completed in the local area. 5.8 Subject to funding, there is a long standing aspiration for an additional cross Thames vehicular route in the Thames Valley Park area which would help ease traffic flow in the area and further support this employment centre.
107
26
Figure 4: Urban Western Area Map
108
27
QUESTION 4a: Are there any areas in the ‘Urban western area’ which you feel are suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 4b: With regard to the land that has been promoted here, would you support the development of any specific areas of land? Please provide details of which ones and the reasons why.
QUESTION 4c: Do you have any comment on the any of the promoted areas of land in the ‘Urban western area’?
QUESTION 4d: Are there any other opportunities for development that have not currently been promoted here? 109 Please provide details and, if possible include the details of who you believe to be the landowner.
28
Wokingham Area 5.9 This area comprises Wokingham town centre and its surrounding residential areas. Wokingham is the largest town in the borough and is its principal settlement. This area is home to a large proportion of the Borough’s population. 5.10 Our existing planning strategy allocated land around the north and south of Wokingham town for strategic scale development including housing, 3 new primary schools and a northern and southern relief road around the town. Much of this development is underway. 5.11 Wokingham provides a lively and diverse centre for shops, jobs, homes and leisure. Wokingham town centre is currently undergoing major regeneration to enhance the centre as part of the masterplan. 5.12 The area has good public transport access with Wokingham train station providing direct routes to London Waterloo and Gatwick airport as well as a quick link to Reading. It also provides a bus interchange for local routes.
110 5.13 The Borough’s largest Core Employment Area of Molly Millars lies just south of the railway line. 5.14 There is a good concentration of well-regarded primary and secondary schools in Wokingham, serving the residential areas around the main urban area. 5.15 Wokingham town centre includes three conservation areas and an area of archaeological interest. A number of green routes run through Wokingham connecting in the centre and Joel Park Site of Urban Landscape Value lies north-west of the centre. Wokingham centre is an Air Quality Management Area and a known road traffic ‘bottleneck’. 5.16 There are a number of sites within the urban area that provide potential to compliment the current regeneration, bringing together homes, jobs, shops and open space.
29
Figure 5: Wokingham Area Map
111
30
QUESTION 5a: Are there any areas in the ‘Wokingham area’ which you feel are suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 5b: With regard to the land that has been promoted here, would you support the development of any specific areas of land? Please provide details of which ones and the reasons why.
QUESTION 5c: Do you have any comment on the any of the promoted areas of land in the ‘Wokingham area’?
QUESTION 5d: Are there any other opportunities for development that have not currently been promoted here? Please provide details and, if possible include the details of who you believe to be the
112 landowner.
31
South Western Area 5.17 The South Western area is divided by the River Loddon and its floodplain and the Blackwater River. The area to the west includes a large number of villages including Shinfield, Three Mile Cross, Spencers Wood, Swallowfield and Riseley. To the east are Arborfield, Arborfield Cross, Barkham and Farley Hill. All these villages are surrounded by open countryside. The area furthest west, beyond the A33, is predominantly open farmland but includes the small village of Grazeley. 5.18 Our existing planning strategy allocated land around the villages of Shinfield, Three Mile Cross, and Spencers Wood in the north, and at the former Arborfield Garrison for strategic scale development including housing, schools and commercial uses. This is supported by investment in a number of new roads, a new secondary school at the Garrison, and other improvements. Land adjacent to the M4 motorway is also allocated for the Thames Valley Science Park which is partly completed. All these allocations have planning permission and are well under way. 5.19 The the southern villages of Riseley, Swallowfield and Farley Hill are modest in scale with no 113 train stations, more limited bus services fewer schools and are semi-rural in character. There may be some opportunities to expand the smaller villages within this area as this may help deliver additional services for local communities. 5.20 The area of land promoted to the west of the A33 around Grazeley forms the largest strategic development opportunity in the borough, and includes land promoted in West Berkshire. It provides an opportunity to create a standalone, distinctive, self-contained settlement providing houses, jobs, schools, and shops that people can walk to without the need to travel elsewhere. There is also big potential for wider connectivity to Reading, which could include a new railway station on the Reading- Basingstoke line, improved access to the new Green Park railway station (currently under construction) and the extension of the existing dedicated bus route (Mass Rapid Transport route). The The emergency planning land provides an opportunity for higher densities, a unique character, and a range of housing types zone has recently been and affordability. Close working with West Berkshire Council and Reading Borough Council is ongoing reviewed and updated. to explore whether development here would be suitable. 5.21 A number of constraints are found in this area. The centre of this area is floodplain around the Foudry Brook. The area also lies to the east of the Burghfield Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE)
32
and partially within the emergency planning zone. There are also known congestion issues along the A33 at peak times as well as Junction 11 of the M4 which are key constraints. 5.22 Due to the rural nature of the area, all existing services such as water, waste, electricity, gas, broadband would need improvements. Large scale development in this area could provide opportunities for major infrastructure improvements, plus schools, open space etc. 5.23 The government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF) and Garden Communities Prospectus provides an opportunity to access grant funding to enable necessary infrastructure improvements to be provided upfront. Development of this scale would be viable without this funding but would require significant upfront funds to put the necessary infrastructure in place before any housing. A key message we receive from residents is that infrastructure should be developed first. We have therefore submitted a bid for funding through these channels. This does not mean a decision has been made to allocate development here, it is merely a sensible approach to keep our options open and so we don’t miss out on this opportunity.
114
33
Figure 6: South Western Area Map
115
34
QUESTION 6a: Are there any areas in the ‘South Western area’ which you feel are suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities? Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 6b: With regard to the land that has been promoted here, would you support the development of any specific areas of land? Please provide details of which ones and the reasons why.
QUESTION 6c: Do you have any comment on the any of the promoted areas of land in the ‘South Western area’?
QUESTION 6d: Are there any other opportunities for development that have not currently been promoted here? Please provide details and, if possible include the details of who you believe to be the
116 landowner.
35
South Eastern Area 5.24 The South East of the borough contains a number of villages including; Finchampstead village, Finchampstead North and Pinewood (Crowthorne, which is Bracknell facing with regards to access to services). 5.25 Outside these settlements, the area mainly consists of open countryside and large public open spaces (Rooks Nest Wood Country Park and California Country Park), with a series of important wildlife sites located within or adjacent to the Borough boundary: Longmoor Bog Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Heathlake SSSI and Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBH SPA). 5.26 North of this area is the large scale development of South Wokingham Strategic Development Location (SDL). The South Wokingham SDL has introduced a new primary school and neighbourhood centre, with a major new sports hub and a further primary school to be delivered. It is noted that a large scale development at the TRL site in Bracknell Forest is under construction close to this area. 117 5.27 Due to the mainly rural setting of the area there is limited access to public transport, however Pinewood has access to Crowthorne train station which provides a direct link to Wokingham Town, Reading, Guilford and Gatwick. Further development within the Borough would provide opportunities to link up the relief roads, which would provide traffic mitigation to the area.
36
Figure 7: South Eastern Area Map
118
37
QUESTION 7a: Are there any areas in the ‘South Eastern area’ which you feel are suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities?
Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 7b: With regard to the land that has been promoted here, would you support the development of any specific areas of land?
Please provide details of which ones and the reasons why.
QUESTION 7c: Do you have any comment on the any of the promoted areas of land in the ‘South Eastern area’?
QUESTION 7d: Are there any other opportunities for development that have not currently been promoted here? 119 Please provide details and, if possible include the details of who you believe to be the landowner.
38
Northern Area 5.28 The northern area includes the villages of Twyford, Hurst, Charvil, Sonning, Wargrave and Remenham, and the surrounding countryside. 5.29 Twyford acts as the principal settlement, providing access to a good range of services and facilities. Twyford train station is on the Great Western Mainline, providing direct trains to London Paddington via Maidenhead and Slough, and to Reading and beyond. The station is also a stop on the forthcoming Crossrail / Elizabeth Line which will provide a route into the City of London, Heathrow airport, and it is where the Henley Branch Line terminates. The other villages have little in the way of services and facilities, although Wargrave is on the Henley Branch Line. 5.30 Most of the northern and western part of this area is designated part of London’s Metropolitan Green Belt which restricts development surrounding the city. Development within the Green Belt or amending the boundary of the Green Belt can only occur in exceptional circumstances. This includes consideration of development opportunities elsewhere. Our evidence base shows that all of land designated Green Belt makes at least an overall ‘Contribution’ to the defined purposes of the Green
120 Belt. Areas that make a ‘Significant Contribution’ to the Green Belt are identified as being the land between Twyford and Wargrave, the land along the Thames River and an area to the south of Ruscombe. Other significant considerations include flood risk and the presence of high quality agricultural land. 5.31 Twyford crossroads is subject to poor air quality due to traffic fumes and is an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The attraction of Crossrail/Elizabeth Line will draw greater volumes of traffic, exacerbating this and local parking issues. The promoted land offers a means to deliver a relief road, which could allow traffic to move around the settlement without travelling through the centre, and could provide public car parking either directly or by relocating existing uses closer to the railway station. This would be dependent on associated housing to fund these improvements.
39
Figure 8: Northern Area Map
121
40
QUESTION 8a: Are there any areas in the ‘Northern area’ which you feel are suited to being more flexible with building heights and development densities?
Please provide details and outline the reasons why.
QUESTION 8b: With regard to the land that has been promoted here, would you support the development of any specific areas of land?
Please provide details of which ones and the reasons why.
QUESTION 8c: Do you have any comment on the any of the promoted areas of land in the ‘Northern area’?
QUESTION 8d: Are there any other opportunities for development that have not currently been promoted here? Please provide details and, if possible include the details of who you believe to be the
122 landowner.
41
Appendix A – Frequently Asked Questions Please see below a few FAQs to help your understanding of the consultation. For a full list of FAQs please see our website at: http://www.wokingham.gov.uk/localplanupdate
Q. How were the sites within the consultation identified?
A. Sites can be put forward by anyone or any organisation (even if they do not own the land) and typically have been promoted by land owners, developers, agents, local businesses and individuals in the Borough. A call for sites exercise took place January to February 2016 and May to Jun 2016 to initiate this and subsequent sites have been individually promoted to the Council in the time following this.
Q. If sites have been promoted and are being assessed does it mean that they will be allocated for 123 development in the Local Plan?
A. No. The assessment of sites will be used to inform the plan, but does not necessarily mean a site will be allocated for development. This is because not all sites considered in the assessment will be suitable or ultimately acceptable for development.
All the sites will be considered holistically across the borough to inform the most appropriate strategy for development. Allocation of land will depend on different policy constraints (such as designated heritage or environmental sites) and practical constraints (such as rivers and flooding). The decision to allocate sites will ultimately be made by the Borough Council following public consultation on the options available, and will need to be supported by an independent planning Inspector through an ‘Examination in Public’ .
Q. Given the number of permissions for housing, can we stop granting more?
A. No. Whilst having a heathy supply of housing is beneficial to resist speculative, unplanned developments, we still need to plan longer term to ensure the supply remains, particularly beyond 2026. Bringing a steady supply of housing sites to the market also helps ensure there is competition
42
in the housing industry, and incentivises other developers to progress their schemes or lose market share.
Q. Why can’t all development take place on brownfield sites, or in urban areas?
A. The Council has to, and does make appropriate use of development opportunities on sites within existing settlements, including previously developed land (brownfield land). Over the last 10 years, around 80 new homes each year are built on previously developed land across the borough.
A limited number of previously developed sites have been promoted to the Council for consideration for future development by the landowner or a developer. Many of these sites will be suitable for development. In places it may be possible to build more homes by building higher or smaller homes, however this needs to be balanced with respecting the character of the area and ensuring high quality design. In summary, there is simply not enough deliverable previously developed land to meet the calculated development needs. For land to be allocated it must be available, and therefore have a willing landowner promoting the site. 124 Q. Why have you undertaken masterplanning on certain sites, and which sites were they?
A. It is important to look at the larger sites in more detail because they provide potential opportunities for large-scale, sustainable and infrastructure-rich housing development, though they also have significant challenges which would need to be overcome. Assessments of these opportunities and constraints are available in the reports that accompany the consultation as background evidence.
The commissioning of the masterplanning work does not pre-judge the outcome of the Local Plan Update. At this stage we do not know and have not committed to any particular approach to deciding which sites could potentially be developed. The masterplanning work will be used to help make a decision on whether any development would be suitable and deliverable at these locations.
Q. Will there be new infrastructure such as roads and schools to support new housing development?
A. Yes. When the Council has a better understanding of where and when development is going to take place, a detailed infrastructure strategy can be prepared. This will set out what infrastructure is
43
needed, to support the new development proposed. This will include new and expanded schools, parks and open spaces, roads and cycleways, and how they will be funded.
The Council recognises the need to delivery new infrastructure to support new communities. Alongside the developments planned for in the existing planning strategy for the borough (the Core Strategy) the Council will deliver over £400m of investments including 7 new primary and 1 new secondary schools; 7 new strategic roads, 6 new neighbourhood centres and 1 new district centre, 3 new sports hubs and one enhanced sports hub, parkland and improvements to public transport, as well as around 35% affordable housing. 125
44
Appendix B – Schedule of Promoted Land – Urban western area
Site Reference Address Site Size (ha) Land use proposed by the promotor 5SH031 Rustlings', 'The Spring' and land 0.05 Housing (C3 Planning Use to the rear of 'Cushendall', Class). Shinfield Road 5WI003 498 Reading Road 0.08 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WI004 Land off Poplar Lane and 32.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Wotmore Lane Class). 5WI006 Land off Maidensfield 10.9 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WI007 Home Farm, Bearwood Road 57.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
126 5WI008 Winnersh Plant Hire 1.53 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WI009 Land on the North West Side of 4.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Old Forest Road Class). 5EA001 Land at Lower Earley Way, 0.81 Housing (C3 Planning Use Danehill, Cutbush Industrial Class). Park 5WI014 69 King Street Lane, 1.25 Housing (C3 Planning Use Winnersh,RG41 5BA Class). 5WI012 Winnersh Allotments, Reading 2.27 Leisure / Public Open Space / Road, Wokingham, RG41 5AG North Wokingham Distributor Road. 5WI013 Millennium Arboretum, to rear of 2.96 Leisure / Public Open Space / properties at 22-28 Wayside, off Other. Old Forest Road, Wokingham, RG41 1 5WO003 Land to rear of and adjacent to 13.6 Leisure / Public Open Space. New Addington School,
45
Woodlands Avenue, Woodley, RG5 3EU 5WI010 Winnersh Farm, Watmore Lane, 9.99 Leisure / Public Open Space. Winnersh, Wokingham, RG41 5NW 5WI005 Winnersh Garden Centre, 5.09 Offices, other than a use within Reading Road A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). Light Industry (B1c Planning Use Class). Storage and Distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). 5WO002 Western Site, Headley Road 6.23 Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). East
127
46
Appendix C – Schedule of Promoted Land – Wokingham area
Site Reference Address Site Size (ha) Land use proposed by the promotor 5WK035 West Forest Gate, 0.43 Housing (C3 Planning Use Finchampstead Road Class). 5WK002 Ashridge Farm, Warren House 17.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5WK006 Land South of Gipsy Lane 4.96 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WK012 54 - 58 Reading Road 0.36 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WK013 Land at Toutley Road 0.37 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WK025 Old Forest Road 0.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use 128 Class). 5WK029 Station Industrial Estate, Oxford 0.65 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5WK030 Millars Business Park, Molly 1.76 Housing (C3 Planning Use Millars Lane Class). 5WK017 Telephone Exchange, Elms Road 0.43 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Financial and Professional Services (A2 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). 5WK009 Wokingham STW, Bell Foundary 4.52 Housing (C3 Planning Use Lane Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5WK011 Land South of London Road 0.75 Housing (C3 Planning Use (Western Field) Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class).
47
5WK019 Carnival Pool Phase 2, 1.41 Housing (C3 Planning Use Wellington Road Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). Drinking Establishments (A4 Planning Use Class). Offices, other than a use within A2 (B1a). Non-residential institutions (D1). Assembly and Leisure (D2) 5WK015 Exa House, Elms Road 0.15 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). Financial and Professional Services (A2 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). Drinking 129 Establishments (A4 Planning Use Class). Hot Food Takeaways (A5) 5WK018 54 - 72 Peach Street 0.27 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). Financial and Professional Services (A2 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). Drinking Establishments (A4 Planning Use Class). Hot Food Takeaways (A5) 5WK008 Ritz Plaza House, 0.13 Not Stated. Easthampstead Road 5WK026 Land adjoining Berkshire Way 9.00 Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG).
48
Appendix D – Schedule of Promoted Land – South western area
Site Reference Address Site Size (ha) Land use proposed by the promotor 5BA006 Land to the rear of 326-334, 0.68 Housing (C3 Planning Use Barkham Ride Class). 5WK033 Land adjacent to 229 Barkham 0.08 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5BA008 Land off Barkham Street 1.80 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA009 Model Farm, Barkham Ride 5.43 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA010 Barkham Square 58.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use
130 Class). 5BA011 Land to the Rear of 370 - 384 0.36 Housing (C3 Planning Use Barkham Road Class). Self-Build. 5BA012 Reading Football Club Training 10.0 Housing (C3 Planning Use Ground, Hogwood Park, Park Class). Assembly and Leisure Lane (D2 Planning Use Class). 5BA013 Woodlands Farm, Wood Lane 1.47 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5BA014 Oakwood View/ Land between 3.47 Housing (C3 Planning Use 30 and 32 Langley Common Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Road Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build.
49
5BA015 Oakwood View/ Land between 0.50 Housing (C3 Planning Use 30 and 32 Langley Common Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Road Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5FI003 31 and 33 Barkham Ride 5.40 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH040 Land at Grazeley, south of M4 211. Housing (C3 Planning Use Motorway Junction 11 and west Class). Residential Institutions of Mereoak Lane (C2 Planning Use Class). Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). Light Industry (B1c Planning Use Class). General Industrial (B2 Planning Use Class). Storage 131 5SH041 Great Lea Farm, Three Mile 2.87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Cross Class). Offices, other than a use within A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). 5AR001 Land to the North of Reading 4.18 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). Potential Sustainable Alternative Greenspace land. 5AR002 Cloud Stables, Church Lane 3.39 Not Stated. 5AR003 Land at Church Lane 0.82 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR004 Land at Reading Road 0.49 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR005 Ridgefield Farm, Reading Road 1.20 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR006 Land on the south side of 1.25 Housing (C3 Planning Use Reading Road Class). 5AR007 Land to the North of School 9.08 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class).
50
5AR008 Land to the South of School 9.62 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5AR009 Land North of School Road 2.80 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5AR010 Land South of School Road 2.89 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). Self- Build. 5AR011 Land off Betty Grove Lane 2.91 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR012 Ducks Nest Farm and 32.1 Housing (C3 Planning Use Chamberlain's Farm Class). 5AR013 Land to the rear of The Copse, 0.74 Housing (C3 Planning Use Eversley Road Class). 5AR014 Land west of Mole Road 10.0 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
132 5AR015 Land at Arborfield 242. Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Offices, other than a use within A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). Non-residential institutions (D1 Planning Use Class). Assembly and Leisure (D2 Planning Use Class). 5BA002 Land at Barkham Manor 1.00 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA003 Land at Suncot, School Road 0.44 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA004 The Bungalow, Edney hill 4.18 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Non-residential institutions (D1 Planning Use Class). 5SH001 Land adjacent to North Lodge, 3.17 Housing (C3 Planning Use Basingstoke Road Class).
51
5SH002 Land west of Basingstoke Road 4.32 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH003 The Paddock, Croft Lane 0.88 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW015 Loddon Court Farm, Beech Hill 35 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5SH005 Derydene, Basingstoke Road 1.26 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH006 Land off Winston Close 3.51 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH007 Land off Sussex Lane 0.71 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH008 Land between Orchard House, 0.25 Housing (C3 Planning Use Sunways and Greenfields, Croft Class). Self-Build. Road
133 5SH009 Land Adjacent to East side of 0.75 Housing (C3 Planning Use Oakbank School Class). 5SH033 Land at Grazeley Road 4.14 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH011 Lane End House, Shinfield Road 0.29 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH012 Land at Cutbush Lane 0.22 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH013 Body's Farm, Basingstoke Road 36.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH014 Land off Sussex Lane 4.00 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH015 Land at Stanbury House, 4.95 Housing (C3 Planning Use Basingstoke Road Class). 5SH016 Land at Three Mile Cross, 13.1 Housing (C3 Planning Use Church Lane Class). 5SH017 Land at Highlands 33.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH018 Lane End Villas 1.56 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
52
5SH019 Parklands, Basingstoke Road 4.51 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH020 Land North of Cutbush Lane 17.6 Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). 5SH021 Land at Kirtons Farm Road 4.43 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). Offices, other than a use within A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). Light Industry (B1c) 5SH022 Land at The Manor, Church 1.60 Housing (C3 Planning Use Lane Class). 5SH023 Land east of Hyde End Road 6.27 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
134 5SH024 Land North West side Church 7.10 Housing (C3 Planning Use Lane Class). 5SH025 Land South of Cutbush Lane 13.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH026 Land South of Millworth Lane 2.39 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH027 Land West of Hyde End Road 2.92 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH029 Land at Grazeley 224. Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). Self- Build. Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). Financial and Professional Services (A2 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3). Drinking Establishment (D2)
53
5SH030 Rose Cottage, Croft Road 0.33 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW001 Land on the North East side of 1.77 Housing (C3 Planning Use Part Lane and the South West Class). side of Church Road, Part lane 5SW002 Land at Basingstoke Road 1.36 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW003 Land adjoining The Lodge, 1.82 Housing (C3 Planning Use Taylors Lane Class). 5SW004 Land off Basingstoke Road 28.1 Not Stated. 5SW005 Site bounded by Trowes Lane 5.68 Housing (C3 Planning Use (to the east) and Oakleigh Farm Class). (to the west) 5SW006 Land off Basingstoke Road 3.62 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
135 5SW007 Land south of The Street and 1.39 Housing (C3 Planning Use west of Trowes Lane Class). 5WI002 Land at Hatch Farm 1.31 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR016 Land adjoining Hunters Point, 0.09 Not Stated. Hughes Green 5SW008 Arkley, Lambs Lane 0.03 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WK022 Land close to Junction of 14.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Bearwood Road and Highlands Class). Residential Institutions Avenue (C2 Planning Use Class). Hotels (C1). Offices (B1). General Industrial (B2). Storage or distribution (B8). Non-residential institutions (D1). Assembly and Leisure (D2). Self-Build 5SH032 Land to the rear of Diana Close 0.98 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
54
5SW009 Land adjacent to Applegarth 4.67 Housing (C3 Planning Use Basingstoke Road Class). Self-Build. Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). 5BA016 Willow Farm, School Road 6.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW010 Land South of Part Lane 3.68 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW011 Land at Bull Lane 1.82 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH010 Land at Grazeley Road 4.10 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SW012 Land at Part Lane 1.63 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA017 Land adjacent to Coppid Hill 1 Housing (C3 Planning Use House, Barkham Road Class). Self-Build. 5SH035 Land at Highlands, Basingstoke 32.7 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). Other.
136 5SW013 Land Adjoining Lambs Farm 1.66 Offices (B1 Planning Use Class). Business Park Storage or distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). 5BA018 Land at Highland Avenue 9.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA019 Wrens Nest Stables, Barkham 1.12 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5BA024 Land to North of the Shires 0.46 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR017 Highview (21 Highfield Park), 0.4 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Eversley Road and plots for Travelling Show People. 5SW014 Land at Fairlands, Church Road, 0.19 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Farley Hill and plots for Travelling Show People. 5SH039 Land North of Church Lane, 2.28 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Three Mile Cross and plots for Travelling Show People.
55
5BA025 29 Bearwood Road 0.59 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5SW016 Land adjacent Oakleigh Farm, 3.50 Housing (C3 Planning Use Part Lane Class). 5AR018 Targetts Farm, Eversley Road N/A Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5BA026 Land north of Barkham Road 1.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Self Build. 5SH042 Land at Basingstoke Road, 4.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Spencers Wood Class). 5AR019 Bound Oak Industrial Estate 1.01 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Self-Build. 5WK039 Land fronting Barkham Road 3.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Amenity and public open
137 space 5SH043 Land to the North of Brookers 0.91 Housing (C3 Planning Use Hill Class). 5SH044 Dobbies Garden Centres Limited 2.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class) 5SW017 Uplands and Land Adjacent to 0.96 Housing (C3 Planning Use uplands, Basingstoke Road, Class). Swallowfield. 5WI015 Hatch Farm 34.1 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WI001 Land at Hatch Farm 1.49 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH045 18 Sevenoaks Drive, Spencers 0.47 Housing (C3 Planning Use Wood Class). 5AR020 Lockey Farm, Sindlesham Road 13.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH046 Land at Stanbury Park, 0.72 Housing (C3 Planning Use Spencers Wood Class).
56
5SW018 Land to the east of Basingstoke 1.31 Housing (C3 Planning USe Road and south of The Street Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5SW019 Land to the north of Charlton 4.23 Housing (C3 Planning Use Lane and east of Trowes Lane Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5AR021 Langley Pond Farm Livery 0.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Stables Class). 5AR022 Langley Pond Farm Paddocks 1.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH047 Pound Green Fields 2.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SH048 Pound Green Yard 0.9 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5AR023 Redwood 0.27 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WI011 Wheatsheaf Close 0.73 Housing (C3 Planning Use
138 Class). 5SH049 Shinfield Grange 5.6 Offices, other than a use within A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). 5SH050 Thames Valley Science Park 2.02 Other. 5BA027 Land to the rear of 178 3.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use Bearwood Road Class). Self-Build.
57
Appendix E – Schedule of Promoted Land – South Eastern area
Land use proposed by the Site Reference Address Site Size (ha) promotor 5FI040 Land at Great Oaks, Fleet Hill 0.82 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI003 31 and 33 Barkham Ride 5.40 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI004 Greenacres Farm, Nine Mile 9.09 Housing (C3 Planning Use Ride Class). 5FI007 Land to the rear of 5 Clayside 0.21 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
139 5FI009 Land at Sandhurst Road 5.18 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI010 Land to the East of 4.87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Finchampstead Road Class). 5FI013 Land to the West of 10.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Finchampstead, Longwater Class). Lane 5FI014 Land to the rear of 6-8, The 0.12 Housing (C3 Planning Use Village Class). 5FI016 Broughton Farm, Heath Ride 0.51 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI017 Paddock Farm, Nine Mile Ride 4.71 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI018 Land to the rear of No. 6 1.06 Housing (C3 Planning Use Johnson Drive Class). 5FI019 Land to the rear of 267 and 273 2.11 Housing (C3 Planning Use Finchampstead Road Class). 5FI020 Land at Warren Lane 0.63 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
58
5FI021 Land to the rear of 76 & 80a 0.92 Housing (C3 Planning Use Reading Road Class). 5FI024 Jovike, Lower Wokingham Road 0.82 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI025 Land North of Nine Mile Ride 14.9 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI026 Land Adjacent to 294 Nine Mile 0.29 Housing (C3 Planning Use Ride Class). 5FI027 Land lying to the rear of 115 - 1.14 Housing (C3 Planning Use 137 Nash Grove Lane Class). 5FI028 Westwood Cottage, Sheerlands 2.31 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5WK034 Land to the east and west of 16.9 Housing (C3 Planning Use Blagrove Lane Class). 5WK032 Land to North of Doles lane 5.73 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WW014 Land at Heathlands, Nine Mile 4.06 Housing (C3 Planning Use
140 Ride Class). 5WW013 Pinecopse, Nine Mile Ride 2.90 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WW012 Heathlands, Land to the East of 0.13 Housing (C3 Planning Use Heathlands Road Class). 5WW010 Land Adjacent to Sulby Court, 1.87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Heathlands Road Class). 5WW016 Land adjacent to Bigwood 6.75 Housing (C3 Planning Use House, Waterloo Road Class). 5WW001 Land between Pinewood Villas 0.49 Housing (C3 Planning Use and St Michael's Cottages, Old Class). Wokingham Road 5WK023 Rosery Cottage and 171 1.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Evendons Lane Class). 5FI030 Bluebell Farm, Commonfield 0.7 Housing (C3 Planning Use Lane Class). 5WW015 Land adjoining Bigwood House, 6.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Waterloo Road Class).
59
5FI039 Land at Bulloways Farm Land, 17 Housing (C3 Planning Use Eversley Class). 5FI041 Land West of Finchampstead 5.26 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5WK037 Land East of Finchampstead 25.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5WK038 Land at Woodcray Manor 65 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WW017 Land East of Pearces Farm, 1.1 Housing (C3 Planning Use Easthampstead Road Class). 5FI042 Land on North Side of Reading 1.02 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). 5FI045 Land at The Rear of 238-240 1.17 Housing (C3 Planning Use Nine Mile Ride Class). 5WK036 Land at the rear of Chapel 1.41 Housing (C3 Planning Use
141 Green House Class). 5FI046 Land east of Wokingham Road, 0.10 Housing (C3 Planning Use and south of Duke's Ride (Derby Class). Field) 5WK028 Land at Blagrove Lane 10 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WW021 Land adjacent to St Sebastians 0.85 Housing (C3 Planning Use Memorial Hall Class). 5WW022 Land south of Oaklands Lane, 0.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Crowthorne Class). 5WK040 Ten Acres Farm 3.96 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5FI005 Silverstock Manor 2.66 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5FI015 Land to the rear of 166 Nine 0.51 Housing (C3 Planning Use Mile Ride Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for
60
Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5WW003 Pine Ridge Park, Nine Mile Ride 6.40 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5WW005 Old Sawmill Lane 0.03 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build. 5FI032 Honey Suckle Lodge, 1.7 Housing (C3 Planning Use Commomfield Lane Class). Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self- Build.
142 5FI008 Land at Church Lane 14.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5WW009 Ravenswood Village 46.0 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5WW002 Pinewood, Nine Mile Ride 9.77 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5FI031 Land at Sandhurst Road 0.68 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5FI047 Land at Longwater Road 2.27 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5FI047 Land at Longwater Road 2.27 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class).
61
5FI002 Heartwood Lodge 0.87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). House in Multiple Occupation (C4 use). Self-Build. Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. 5FI038 Land at Finchampstead Rd 10.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Wokingham Class). Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). Self- build 5FI022 Land at Horns Farm, Reading 0.73 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). Self-Build. 5FI023 Land to the South of Reading 0.52 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). Self-Build. 5WK021 Land at the Bowers 0.23 Housing (C3 Planning Use 143 Class). Self-Build. 5FI029 The Ridges 2.83 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Self-Build. 5WW018 Heathlands Farm 39.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Self-Build. 5WW019 Holme Grange Farm 6.14 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Self-Build. 5WW020 Land west of Holme Grange 11.7 Housing (C3 Planning Use Farm Class). Self-Build. 5WW004 Birchin Inhms Farm, Heathlands 31.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Road Class). Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). 5WW006 Grays Farm, Heathlands Road, 25.9 Leisure. Wokingham, RG40 3AN 5WW011 Heathlands Garden Centre, 3.77 Offices, other than a use within Heathlands A2 (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). Light
62
Industry (B1c Planning Use Class). Storage and Distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). 5FI033 Meadowside Plot 1, Park Lane 0.17 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. 5FI034 Meadowside Plot 2, Park Lane 0.17 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. 5FI035 23a Nine Mile Ride 0.69 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. 5FI037 Land West of Twin Oaks, 0.10 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Longwater Lane and plots for Travelling Show People. 5FI012 Land Opposite Hall Farm, Lower 2.92 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Sandhurst Road and plots for Travelling Show
144 People. Self-Build.
63
Appendix F – Schedule of Promoted Land – Northern area
Site Reference Address Site Size (ha) Land use proposed by the promotor 5CV001 Land East & West of Park View 12.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Drive North 5HU001 Little Hill Road 1.79 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU002 Land adjacent to Whistley Green 0.33 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Cottage, Whistley Green 5HU003 Whistley Meadow St Nicholas, 18.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Whistley Green 5HU004 Land at Broadcommon Road 4.24 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU005 Land at The Phoenix, Nelson's 1.85 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Lane
145 5HU007 land at St Swithins Cottage, 1.16 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Hinton Road 5HU008 Land off Lodge Road 0.87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU009 Oak View Farm, Forest Road 6.81 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU010 Land North of the A329 (M), 4.33 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Ashridge Farm, Land Off Twyford Road 5HU011 Pikes Farm, Forest Road 17.1 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU012 Ashridgewood Place, Forest 3.46 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road 5HU013 Land On The North West Side Of 22.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Harp Farm 5HU014 Warren Farm, Forest Road 48.0 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU015 Ashridgewood Farm, Warren 38.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). House Road 5HU016 Land on the east side of Lodge 10.4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road 5HU017 Ashridgewood, Forest Road 35.7 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU020 Land on the east side of Twyford 9.29 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road
64
5HU021 Land On The South Side Of 7.33 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Forest Road 5HU022 The Bill Hill Estate, Twyford 43.6 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road 5HU023 Ashridge Manor Forest Farm 7.01 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5RU001 Land to the west of London 41.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road 5SO001 Land at Sonning Farm 1.29 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SO002 Land East of Garde Road 6.16 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SO003 Land North of Thames Street 3.45 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SO004 Land West of Milestone Avenue 8.81 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5WA007 Primrose Nursery, London Road 2.02 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5TW005 Land at Bridge Farm 7.31 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5TW011 Land North of A4 New Bath 24.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road and west of A321 Wargrave Road 5CV004 3 Norris Green 0.28 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 146 5HU027 Walden Acres, Wokingham Road 1.29 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5TW007 Land north of the A4 23.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU028 West Lodge strip of land North 1.68 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). and South, Lodge Road 5HU029 Triangle outside Hurst House 0.35 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5TW008 134 Wargrave Road 0.01 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5RU002 Land North of Castle End Road 13.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5RU003 Land East of Church Lane 6.64 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU030 Land North-West of Hogmoor 4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Lane 5HU031 Land South-West Broadwater 2.41 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Lane 5HU032 Land southwest of 2.06 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Broadcommon Road 5HU033 Land at Stokes Farm, Binfield 78 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road 5WA006 Land at the Eastern end of 'The 1.36 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Old House'
65
5HU034 Land West of Dunt Lane/ South 18 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). of Green Lane 5TW009 Land West of Twyford 5.60 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU035 Heriots, Wokingham Road 4 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5TW010 Land at Bridge Farm 12.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5SO005 Land at Sonning Golf Club, 0.77 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Duffield Road 5CV002 Land West of Park Lane 1.44 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5RU006 Land at Ruscombe 87 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU039 White Cottage, Forest Road 3.2 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU040 Galtimore, Dunt Lane, Hurst, Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). RG10 0TB 5CV005 Land to the rear of Oaktree 1.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Cottage 5HU041 The Lodge, Ashridge Manor, 0.8 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class).
147 Forest Road, Wokingham, RG40 5RA 5RU004 Land at Southbury Lane 43.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU045 Manor Farm, Binfield Road 2.63 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU043 Land to the west of Hurst Road 14.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). 5HU044 Land between Davis Way & 1.01 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Little Hill Road Housing in Mulitple Occupation (C4 use). 5HU025 Hedgerley Stables 1.5 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Offices (B1 Planning Use Class). Storage or distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). Non- residential institutions (D1 Planning Use Class). Assembly and leisure (D2 Planning Use Class). 5HU026 Hedgerley Stables 0.3 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Offices (B1 Planning Use Class). Storage or distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). Non- residential institutions (D1
66
Planning Use Class). Assembly and leisure (D2 Planning Use Class). 5SO007 Land Adjacent to Model Farm 0.19 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Cottages Bath Road Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. Self-Build. 5RU007 Land to the rear of 9-17 0.51 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Northbury Lane, Ruscombe, Residential Institutions (C2 RG10 9LH Planning Use Class). 5RU008 Land between 39-53 New Road, 0.86 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Ruscombe, RG10 9LQ Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5HU006 Land on the North Side of 1.17 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Orchard Road Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). Other. 5WA005 Land West of Wargrave Road 2.35 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). and North of the A4 New Bath Residential Institutions (C2
148 Road Planning Use Class). Self-Build. Other. 5WA009 Land ajoining Bear Cottage, 0.55 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Milley Lane, Hare Hatch, RG10 Self Build. 9TL 5RU005 Land to the East of London 38 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Road Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). 5TW006 Land West of Hurst Road 2.72 Housing (C3 Planning Use Class). Storage and Distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). 5HU037 Dinton Pastures, Sandford Lane, 16.5 Leisure. Davis Street, Hurst, RG10 0SU 5WA003 Primrose Nursery, London Road 2.2 Not Stated. 5WA010 Sheeplands Farm, New Bath 2.2 Not Stated. Road 5HU019 Land To The South Of Units 1 To 0.49 Offices, other than a use within A2 12 Beech Court, Wokingham (B1a Planning Use Class). Road
67
5HU024 Land to the North of London 41.4 Offices, other than a use within A2 Road and East of the A329M (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). 5WA008 Hare Hatch Garden Centre, 3.65 Offices, other than a use within A2 Floral Mile, Hare Hatch. (B1a Planning Use Class). Research and development of products and processes (B1b Planning Use Class). Light Industry (B1c Planning Use Class). Storage and Distribution (B8 Planning Use Class). 5HU038 Wind in the Willows (Land 0.20 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers adjacent to Cartef Farm) and plots for Travelling Show People. 149 5CV003 Wallys Mobile Home Park 0.28 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers and plots for Travelling Show People. 5SO006 Land at Russell's Field/Ali's 0.69 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Pond, Sonning Lane and plots for Travelling Show People. 5HU018 Land on North West side of 1.61 Pitches for Gypsy and Travellers Nelsons Lane and plots for Travelling Show People. Self-Build. 5WA004 Land to the South of Bath Road 3.13 Residential Institutions (C2 Planning Use Class). 5HU042 Land at Junction of Davis Street 0.12 Self Build. and Dunt Lane 5WA002 Hare Hatch Sheeplands 3.60 Shops (A1 Planning Use Class). Restaurants and Cafes (A3 Planning Use Class). Assembly and Leisure (D2 Planning Use Class).
68
WOKINGHAM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN 150 Local Plan Update: Towards our Strategy Consultation
Wokingham Borough Council Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham Berkshire RG40 1WR
Telephone: (0118) 974 6478 Email: [email protected]