19 homes at Ladds Garden Village, Hare Hatch, Wokingham

What was proposed

The application sought 19 dwellings, parking, landscaping and access after demolishing the existing garden centre buildings and structures.

“Applicant Westbourne Homes Ltd. Site Address Ladds Garden Village, Bath Road, Hare Hatch, Wokingham, RG10 9SB Proposal Full application for the proposed erection of 19no. dwellings with associated landscaping and access following demolition of existing buildings. Type Full Officer Marcus Watts Reason for determination by committee Major application…”

“This proposal seeks full planning permission for the demolition of the existing buildings and structures at the former Ladds Garden Village site, Hare Hatch, and the redevelopment of the site to provide 19 dwellings with associated access, parking, landscaping, open space and drainage infrastructure.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the scheme would reuse previously developed land, improve the site, provide homes and biodiversity gain, and avoid unacceptable impacts.

“The site lies within the countryside and Green Belt and, when assessed solely against the adopted development plan, the proposal conflicts with the spatial strategy for development beyond settlement limits. However, the site is previously developed land and it is concluded that the scheme would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and is therefore not inappropriate development in Green Belt terms.”

“The proposal would redevelop an under-utilised commercial site, improve the visual appearance of the site and wider landscape setting, provide a good quality mix of housing, deliver biodiversity net gain and sustainability benefits, and would not give rise to unacceptable impacts in respect of highway safety, residential amenity, flood risk, drainage, ecology, or contamination.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A resident spoke against the application, while a representative of the applicant supported redevelopment, housing delivery, landscaping, biodiversity and highway improvements.

What members discussed

Members discussed speed limits, levels, boundary screening, lighting, access, flood resilience, contributions, biodiversity, affordability, sustainability and overlooking.

“The change in speed limits. • Clarification was sought on the slab level. • Mature shrubbery along the eastern and southern boundaries. • A preference for low level lighting was expressed. • The location of the footpath and flood resilience measure. • The green infrastructure off site contribution. • Biodiversity net gain.”

“The Committee discussed the sustainability of the site. It was noted that Highways Officers had determined that it was not a sustainable site in terms of accessibility from sustainable transport modes. A Councillor commented that if travelling to Twyford station, parking was difficult. However, there were mitigating factors which reduced the harm and the tilted balance, including the fact that the site was not isolated.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to amended conditions, informatives and a legal agreement securing contributions and management arrangements.

“RESOLVED: That application 252257 be approved subject to conditions and informatives outlined in pages 103 to 112, amended conditions 2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 24, and the completion of a S106 legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations: - Affordable Housing Contribution – in lieu of onsite provision. - Employment and Skills Plan – Employment and Skill Plan or in lieu contribution to be provided.”

Minutes