EASTERN AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 16TH JUNE 2010 UPDATE REPORT Item Application (1) 10/00556/HOUSE Page No. 35 No: No: Brickfields, Blandys Lane, Upper Basildon. Site: Planning Officer Jake Brown Presenting: Member Presenting: N/a Parish Representative N/a speaking: Objector(s) speaking: Mr Chris Patterson Supporter(s) speaking: N/a Applicant/Agent speaking: Mr Dominic Morse Ward Member: Councillor Alan Law No update information. Item: (1) Application No: 10/00556/HOUSE Page 1 EASTERN AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 16TH JUNE 2010 UPDATE REPORT Item Application (2) 10/00631/HOUSE Page No. 49 No: No: Site: 6 Charrington Road, Calcot Planning Officer Dave Pearson Presenting: Member Presenting: N/a Parish Representative Mrs Bedwell – Holybrook PC speaking: Objector(s) speaking: Mr Tony Klinkenberg Mr Gilbert Supporter(s) speaking: N/a Applicant/Agent speaking: Mr Gareth Thomas – Applicant Mr Joe Smith Ward Member: Cllr Argyle, Cllr Bedwell and Cllr Gopal Update as presented on 26th May 2010 1. Consultations and Representations An additional representation has been received form an existing objector. One of the original objectors has submitted additional information which included two documents, a Reserved Matters notice of decision and a HM Land Registry extract. The Reserved Matters Notice of Decision submitted, application number 112296, appears to be for Phase 1 of the development at Beansheaf Farm, Calcot, Theale (Res Mat) and as such it is unclear whether the property in question falls within phase 1 or phase 2. Notwithstanding the above, the Reserved Matters Notice of Decision for application number 112297 (Res Mat) which covers Phase 2 of the Residential Development at Beansheaf Farm, Calcot, Theale has been referred to in the Committee report under 6.1.3. The conditions relating to walls, gates, fences or means of enclosure in relation to permitted development and the erection of buildings, walls, fences, hedges, trees and shrubs in relation to site lines are imposed on both applications 112296 and 112297 and as such the considerations set out on the report continue to apply. Item: (2) Application No: 10/00631/HOUSE Page 1 of 2 The second document received, a HM Land Registry extract is not a material planning consideration and therefore does not affect the consideration and determination of this application 2. Impact on Character of the area As noted in the main agenda report the officer has to take into account what could be permitted under permitted development allowances for the property without requiring planning permission. For Information the following extract is taken form The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 and refers to the relevant section relating to the erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure. Schedule 2, Part 2 – Minor Operations. Class A Permitted Development A. The erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure. Development not Permitted A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if – (a) the height of any gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed adjacent to a highway used by vehicular traffic would, after the carrying out of the development, exceed one metre above ground level; (b) the height of any other gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure erected or constructed would exceed two metres above ground level; (c) the height of any gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure maintained, improved or altered would as a result of the development, exceed its former height of the height referred to in sub- paragraph (a) or (b) as the height appropriate to it if erected or constructed, whichever is the greater; or (d) it would involve development within the curtilage of, or to a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure surrounding, a listed building. Given the permitted development rights stated above with regard to brick walls, essentially what we are assessing within this application is whether 20cm of brick wall and a further 20 cm on top of this for each of the five piers has any demonstrable harm on the street scene or character of the area. In light of the above and with regard to all matters raised the Officer recommendation remains unchanged. 3. Additional Informative 1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken because the development is in accordance with the development plan and would have no significant impact on the character and appearance of the area or the residential amenities of the occupants of the adjacent dwellings. This informative is only intended as a summary of the reason for the grant of planning permission. For further details on the decision please see the application report which is available from the Planning Service or the Council website Item: (2) Application No: 10/00631/HOUSE Page 2 of 2 Update 16th June 2010 1. Amended plans and Elevations (copy attached) Concern was raised at the last Committee Meeting on 26th May 2010 with regards to the accuracy of the plans. As such amended information was sought; • 2 Sections of Garden Wall at 6 Charrington Road, Calcot • Front Elevation Amended drawings show an increase in height of the wall from 1.2m in height to 1.3m and an increase in height of the piers from 1.4m to 1.5m. They also indicate an increase in the width of the driveway access from 2.8m to 3.3m. These amendments to the height are not considered to change the points discussed in the Committee report. 2. Additional Representations received since Eastern Area Committee Meeting on 26th May 2010. An additional representation has been received from an existing objector. One of the original objectors has submitted two additional documents which include a local press report regarding a motorbike accident along Charrington Road in October 2001 and a photograph of the front elevation of 6Charrington Road with dimensions indicating the height of the wall. These documents raise further concern for highway safety, this has been addressed in the report under section 6.4 Highways Safety of the main report. Item: (2) Application No: 10/00631/HOUSE Page 3 of 2 ITEM FOR DECISION Item Application No. Proposal, Location and Applicant No and Parish 10/00562/FULEX Renewal of planning permission 04/01219/FULMAJ - Proposed residential development of 350 houses and apartments with associated access, parking, amenity space and landscaping Lakeside The Green Theale Reading Berkshire Recommendation Summary: That Members amend the resolution to grant planning permission made at the Eastern Area Planning Committee held on 26 May 2010 as follows: To DELEGATE to the Head of Planning & Countryside to GRANT PERMISSION subject to the response Nuclear Safety Directorate raising no further issues and the completion of a S106 Agreement by 14th July 2010. OR If the Legal Agreement is not completed by the 14th July 2010 to DELEGATE to the Head of Planning & Countryside to REFUSE PERMISSION for the following reasons: Ward Member(s): Councillor A.M. Macro Reason for Committee This item was determined by the Eastern Area Determination: Planning Committee on 26th May 2010. Committee Site Visit: N/A Contact Officer Details Name: Katherine Goodchild Job Title: Planning Officer Tel No: (01635) 519111 E-mail Address: [email protected] West Berkshire Council Eastern Area Planning Sub-Committee 16 June 2010 1. Background Information 1.1. The Council and the applicant have tried to expedite the completion of the S106 agreement but negotiations with the various services over specific requirements of the proposed agreement are ongoing and unlikely to be completed by the 21st June 2010, the date stipulated by Members when determining the application on 20th May. 1.2. The Development Control Manager and the Legal Service agree that the proposed revised date of the 14th July is a reasonable extension of time during which the agreement should be completed but also that refusal should be completed but also that refusal could be more easily defended at appeal if the S106 agreement is not completed by this date, having demonstrated reasonableness in allowing a further limited period of time for completion. 2. Conclusion 2.1. In light of the above it is recommended by officers that an extension to the timescale for completion of the Section 106 agreement be granted and the reason for refusal should the agreement not be completed be amended to reflect this extension of time. 3. Full Recommendation 3.1. To DELEGATE to the Head of Planning & Countryside to GRANT PERMISSION subject to the response Nuclear Safety Directorate raising no further issues and the completion of a S106 Agreement by 14th July 2010. Heads of Terms for the Legal Agreement and Conditions and Informatives as resolved by the Eastern Area Planning Committee on 26th May 2010. OR If the Legal Agreement is not completed by the 14th July 2010 to DELEGATE to the Head of Planning & Countryside to REFUSE PERMISSION for the following reasons: Reasons as resolved by the Eastern Area Planning Committee on 26th May 2010. West Berkshire Council Eastern Area Planning Sub-Committee 16 June 2010 .