Agenda item

Application for approval of Reserved Matters (scale, appearance, layout and landscaping) following consent granted under reference P18/S3210/O (approved under appeal reference APP/Q3115/W/19/3220425) - extra care development of up to 65 units comprising of apartments and cottages (Use Class C2); associated communal facilities; provision of vehicular and cycle parking together with all necessary internal roads and footpaths; provision of open space and associated landscape works; and ancillary works and structures. (As amended by revised landscaping plans received on 3 February 2022)

The committee considered application P21/S4102/RM for approval of Reserved Matters (scale, appearance, layout and landscaping) following consent granted under reference P18/S3210/O (approved under appeal reference APP/Q3115/W/19/3220425) - extra care development of up to 65 units comprising of apartments and cottages (Use Class C2); associated communal facilities; provision of vehicular and cycle parking together with all necessary internal roads and footpaths; provision of open space and associated landscape works; and ancillary works and structures (As amended by revised landscaping plans received on 3 February 2022) on Land East of Reading Road, Lower Shiplake.

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting.

The planning officer reported that this was a reserved matters application following consent granted under application P18/S3210/O for up to 65 dwellings, which had been granted on appeal.  It was also reported that members of the committee had attended a site visit at the location on Monday 21 February 2022.

The planning officer reported that some changes to the size of some elements of the application had been made. Appendix D of the report depicted how the footprint of the buildings had been reduced by a modification of the size of the clubhouse (block A) and a re-orientation of block E. The remainder of the differences were limited to a less engineered road layout and a re-organisation of the car parking layout. These differences had been made in order to achieve a better, less engineered and more welcoming scheme than the approved parameter plan had suggested.

The Site Parameters Plan identified two buffer zones around the edge of the development, a 10 - metre landscaping buffer zone comprising existing and proposed structural planting, and a further 5 - metre buffer zone, which excluded built form, and was designed to offset the buildings from the structural planting. The layout shown on the approved Site Parameter Plan indicated several locations where parking areas encroached into the inner 5 - metre buffer zone, together with the bin storage area encroaching into the outer 10 - metre buffer zone as well. These locations were highlighted on the Comparison Plan at Appendix D of the report. The planning officer also reported that the plans submitted with the application indicated that the proposed building heights and block sizes complied with the maximums set out on the approved parameters plan.  All landscaping proposals had been maintained and additional proposed planting in the north east and by the bin store would incorporate trees of a heavier standard. The proposals for landscaping were acceptable for the purposes of screening, as set out in the inspector’s report.

The planning officer reported on some design aspects of the proposal; council planning officers had concluded that this was a well - designed scheme. In Block B there had been an intention to move away from an institutional appearance to the buildings, incorporating overlapping eaves and the club house was designed to resemble a barn. The applicants had consulted the Chilterns design guide for inspiration. Also, it was noted that there had been some concern in respect of the height of some of the proposed units. The planning officer reported that a sub - division of Block C incorporated a ‘step down’ in following the contours of the land, which allowed for extra flats. The finally resulting development would be no higher than the maximum height featured in the outline planning permission documentation. The planning officer reported on concerns in respect of potential lighting glare to properties on Baskerville Lane, using computer generated imagery in a slide presentation. The cottages and club house would be served by low level bollard lighting, which would be controlled by a planning condition in the event of planning permission being granted. Also regarding light emissions, it was reported that the overhanging gable design would minimise light spill. In respect of the club house, a proposed planning condition setting the hours of use, as communal facilities would be provided, was recommended to ensure that lighting was not used late at night. The committee noted from the report that the applicants had produced a lighting statement technical note to assess the potential impacts of the proposals.

In response to a question from the committee regarding the maximum number of units in the development, the planning officer responded that the parameter plan provided an indicative figure of a maximum of 65 units, but that fewer units could be acceptable.

Councillor Chris Penrose, a representative of Shiplake Parish Council, spoke objecting to the application.

Ms. Charlotte Taylor-Drake, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

Mr. Nick Baker, the architect, spoke in support of the application.

Mr. Scott Curran, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

In response to a question from the committee regarding the basis of the calculation for the number of car parking spaces, the agent replied that the provision had been stipulated by the Oxfordshire County Council, the highways authority.

In response to a question from the committee regarding access to the facility by people with limited mobility, the architect responded that there would be lifts in every apartment building and that the cottages could accept stairlifts.

Councillor David Bartholomew, a local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application.

The planning officer reported that it had been established at outline stage that the site would result in a net loss of biodiversity. At that time the Council considered this acceptable, subject to a suitable condition requiring the loss to be offset. However, the requested offsetting condition was not applied by the Inspector. This reserved matters application also showed a net loss of biodiversity. Officers therefore considered it necessary to impose a condition requiring the loss of biodiversity to be offset.

The planning officer reported that Shiplake Parish Council had prepared a submission draft neighbourhood plan, the publicity period on the draft plan concluded on Tuesday 7 December 2021 and the draft plan had been submitted for independent examination. At this stage, the policies in the plan could only be given limited weight, as it has not been examined.

The committee concluded that concerns regarding some aspects of the proposal had been adequately addressed in the recommended conditions and that planning permission should be granted.

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant reserved matters approval for application P21/S4102/RM subject to the following conditions:

1.       Development in accordance with approved plans

2.       Biodiversity offsetting

3.       Landscape implementation

4.       Restricted hours of operation (clubhouse) for lighting and use of           internal blinds

5.       Cycle Parking

6.       Energy Statement Verification