South Wokingham (Swspd)

CONSULTATION SUMMARY – SOUTH WOKINGHAM (SWSPD) SOUTH WOKINGHAM SDL SPD: SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR STATUTORY CONSULTATION JUNE-JULY 2011 INTRODUCTION This report contains a summary of the comments received as a result of the statutory consultation on the draft SPD. It also provides suggested responses from the Council, alongside recommendations regarding changes to the draft SPDs. Overall, it is important to note that consultation comments addressed matters that broadly divide into three categories: Adopted Core Strategy: Matters which have already been agreed in the Adopted Core Strategy, and are covered by policies contained within that document. The SPD cannot alter or amend policies e.g. the principle of the development and the number of dwellings required for each SDL. These issues, whilst relevant to the development of the SDLs are outside the role and function to the SPDs. SPD: Matters that are within the scope of the SPD, e.g. the preferred areas for development and the design quality of the development, and are therefore worthy of full consideration for the purposes of the consultation exercise. Where it is considered appropriate, changes to the SPD have been recommended in response to these comments. Implementation: Matters which will be considered as part of the ongoing Development Management process, in light of the fact that the development of large scale SDLs will require ongoing design, planning and review over the anticipated build-out period. This includes, for example, the detailed design of highways, specific junction improvements and flood prevention and protection measures. Inevitably there will be some areas of overlap. However, the following matrix indicates in the right-hand column under “WBC Response” which category the issue being discussed most appropriately falls into. Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis will be based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of people made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. CONSULTATION SUMMARY – SOUTH WOKINGHAM (SWSPD) South Wokingham Strategic Development Location SPD – Consultation Responses Theme 1: THE SDL DEVELOPMENT – Topic: Availability of land for development / Greenfield development / Scale of development / Separation of settlements Number Reference No. Name Summary of comment Suggested WBC response Availability of land for development FC2/SW/7 Mark Leedale Planning Waterloo Crossing Cottage lies within the identified settlement. Land has not been made available for Summary the major housing site. House builders have no objection to the land and property being developed Requests for the inclusion of Knoll Farm in in its own right. Please amend key diagram to the SDL and the exclusion of Waterloo accurately reflect the available land. Crossing Cottage from the SLD. The former FC2/SW/1E Robert Plester No-one wants these developments. Tell the would bring benefits in terms of highway government to build any extra houses away from safety and strategic flood risk assessment. the already crowded South East of England The latter can be developed independently FC2/SW/44 Michael Bingham My clients have engaged with the consortium of of the SDL. housebuilders/developers who control the South of Wokingham SDL. The talks have been positive, to the WBC Response extent that the consortium would be interested in including the land at Knoll Farm within the development area. The The SDL boundary has been established, land is currently sandwiched between existing built development to the north, with the allocated development consulted on and agreed through the Core land to the south. As such, it would make sense for the Strategy process. The SPD cannot amend site to be included as part of the SDL development area, the SDL boundary as it cannot amend the rather than to leave a small farm operating amidst the content of policy documents. Knoll Farm is surrounding development. inside the SDL boundary Clear benefits to including the land – existing access to Recommendation: No change the site could be closed off, dramatically improving the recommended highway safety aspects. Furthermore, all farm related traffic would no longer use Gipsy Lane. Including Knoll Farm within the SDL boundaries would allow for a comprehensive flood risk assessment to be carried out. Clearly, any development on Knoll Farm would respect the existing watercourses by not developing within the associated flood zones. Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis will be based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of people made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. CONSULTATION SUMMARY – SOUTH WOKINGHAM (SWSPD) Greenfield development FC2/SW/4 Andy Fairclough Once green belt and green space is destroyed it is gone forever for future generations. The local Summary council seems hellbent on destroying and ruining [it] forever against the wishes of the local populace. Concern is expressed about the loss of FC2/SW/9 Colin Knight Building 650 houses will erode the previous Green open countryside and green space in and Belt between Wokingham and Bracknell and destroy around Wokingham. the rural image on the approach to Wokingham from the East. Objection to Greenfield development taking FC2/SW/23 Helen Dodsworth Brownfield land should be used before Greenfield place in advance of Brownfield land. development. Considerable land is available FC2/SW/24 Marion Knowles Brownfield land should be used before Greenfield at Reading to accommodate homes on land. Brownfield land. FC2/SW/25 Nina Bell-Williamson Brownfield land should be used before Greenfield land. WBC Response FC2/SW/26 and Gareth Rees Brownfield land should be used before Greenfield FC2/SW/03 land. The SDL boundary has been established, FC2/SW/34 Martin Bloomfield The loss of green space will completely change the consulted on and agreed through the Core look and feel of the area. Strategy process. The SPD cannot amend FC2/SW/40 Mr and Mrs Lee-Smith Brownfield land should be used before Greenfield the SDL boundary as it cannot amend the land. content of policy documents. FC2/SW/48 Mary Williams Oppose any future homes development on Greenfield space. Wokingham has access to a The scale of housing to be developed within large area of Brownfield locations, which should be the Borough cannot be accommodated on used so that Greenfields are not destroyed. Brownfield land. The Council cannot seek to FC2/SW/88 Ralph and Rosalind Further development such as the new Keephatch deliver housing outside the Borough Hardy area, other than infill where suitable, should be boundary. dismissed entirely unless local residents vote for it. There are areas the other side of Reading with more In accordance with the Core Strategy the brown-field sites whereas Wokingham is dying of SWSPD makes provision for open space suffocation. and SANG to meet the needs of the FC2/SW/89 Kim Russell and Philip Unable to find any substantial countryside left in the proposed SDL and the SDL also includes Fitness whole project. It all seems to be about squeezing as areas that will be retained and covered by countryside designation. many homes onto as small an area as possible, Wokingham is to be a town of concrete Recommendation: No change Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis will be based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of people made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. CONSULTATION SUMMARY – SOUTH WOKINGHAM (SWSPD) monstrosities with pocket-handkerchief gardens for recommended the masses. FC2/SW/93 Leslie Skinner It addition we have the proposed rail link between Reading and Heathrow coming through Wokingham, more supermarkets and the last bit of greenery in town, Elms Road to be built on plus the Cricket Ground – please stop this madness to a historic market town. Scale of development FC2/SW/2E Simon Daughters Need to move the boundary for rural interface development further north to start parallel to Long Summary Patch and White Horse Cottage to be more sympathetic to existing development. Confirmation Objection to the new development is that Long Patch is included in the new settlement expressed on the grounds that new sites do boundaries is requested. not need to be designated and there is no FC2/SW/9 Colin Knight No need to build more houses for next 5 years as need for new houses as there are planning approval has been granted for 1900 outstanding consents within the Borough. houses, and Jennet Park remains undeveloped. FC2/SW/15 Patricia Green All windfall sites as well as reserved sites for houses The view is expressed that housing must be counted towards the total number for the numbers should be reduced, and the impact Borough. There is no need to designate any further of development in Wokingham and sites.

Load more