Minutes 10th September 2015

Minutes of the Meeting of the Council

Date: Thursday 10th September 2015 Time: 7.30pm
Place: Main Hall, Bramley Village Hall
Present: Cllr Durrant (Chair) Cllr Ansell
Cllr Lane Cllr Lane
Cllr Capel Cllr Marshall
Cllr Murphy
In Attendance: Maxta Thomas (Clerk) 100 members of the public
Apologies: Cllr Bell Cllr Clarke
  Cllr Robinson (Borough) Cllr Tomblin (Borough)

 

Action

1 Apologies for Absence

As listed above.

2 Declarations of Interest

None.

4 Planning & Development

a.

15/02304/RES – Land Minchens Lane Bramley

Reserved matters application for Phase 1 for the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of 57 dwellings, (pursuant to Outline planning permission 14/01075/OUT for 200 dwellings)

Cllr Durrant gave a brief outline of the application.  He attended a preliminary meeting with BDBC officers and Cllr Tomblin about the reserved matters.  Some issues have already been raised with BDBC by Bramley PC, and these cover concerns over parking, and the shape of some of the houses.  There are further issues with final finishes and the look of the houses which also need to be raised.

Further comments were made by members of the public and parish councillors as follows:

  • The 40% affordable housing quota across the whole site was queried, particularly in light of the proposed Manydown development.  Cllr Durrant confirmed that in this instance the quota was not an objection – it is an ongoing issue that Bramley PC has repeatedly raised with BDBC.  Cllr Joyce Bowyer, who is a parish councillor for Sherfield PC and Borough Councillor for the Chineham Ward, observed that Manydown was a special instance – a 40% affordable housing quota at the site would ultimately cost the tax payer money.  However, it is the set figure for all other development areas in the borough.  Cllr Ansell observed that delays with Manydown is pushing a lot of development back on the rural areas – Cllr Bowyer acknowledged that this is an issue.
  • The emerging Local Plan states that 200 houses should be built in Bramley within the settlement boundary.  Officers from BDBC have confirmed that the Minchens Lane development will meet this requirement, and Bramley PC will remind officers of this any time it responds to future applications for development in the village.
  • Once concerns are raised about reserved matters, BDBC will take it back to the developers for discussion.  It is hoped that Bramley PC will be involved at all stages of such discussions.

It was unanimously agreed that the Clerk and Chair will respond as outlined above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clerk/Cllr Durrant

b.

15/02513/RES – Razors Farm Cufaude Lane Chineham

Reserved matters application for the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of 143 no. dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping forming phase 1 of outline planning permission BDB/77341

Cllr Durrant noted that there was a lot of content in this application and proposed that discussion on it be postponed until the PC meeting on 16th September to allow all councillors to fully investigate the application.  This was unanimously agreed.

c.

15/02321/ROC – Bow Brook Farm Vyne Road Bramley

Variation of conditions 1, 3, 4 and 13 of planning permission BDB/76293 to allow alterations to fenestrations, internal layout and installation of rooflights to barn and stables. Erection of new horse walker, amendments to landscaping, fencing, hedgerow and extended earth bund (part retrospective)

The Clerk confirmed that she has obtained an extension on the deadline, and that the application can therefore be discussed at the PC meeting on 16th September.  Cllr Durrant proposed the postponement, which was unanimously agreed.

 

d.

15/02472/HSE – 28 Longbridge Road Bramley

Erection of part single, part first floor extension

Due to deadlines on this application, all councillors have commented via email.  It was confirmed unanimously at this meeting that there were no objections.

e.

15/02533/HSE – 51 Longbridge Road Bramley

Erection of single storey conservatory to the side and rear

Due to deadlines on this application, all councillors have commented via email.  It was confirmed unanimously at this meeting that there were no objections.

 

f.

15/02713/GPDE – 1A Oakmead Bramley

Erection of single storey orangery to rear elevation

As this application falls under the permitted development rules, it was noted by the Parish Council with no further comments.

 

g.

15/02708/OUT & 15/02682/OUT – Open Forum

Cllr Durrant noted that Bramley PCs standing position on major development in Bramley is to object.  He asked if all councillors were happy to maintain this position – it was unanimously agreed that this is the case.

Cllr Durrant noted the various criteria that the Council can object on, but noted that the PC needs to extend this to reflect the view of residents of the village.

Cllr Durrant then invited questions from the floor.  These are outlined below.

  • Where is the traffic going to go from this development?  Cllr Durrant stated that the exit planned is where the existing gate into the field is from the C32.
  • Why has Bramley attracted so much development?  Cllr Durrant explained that BDBC cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year land supply due to the lack of a Local Plan.  This leaves a significant window of opportunity for developers.  The current BDBC strategy is to made existing developed areas bigger – Bramley, Whitchurch and Overton are all listed as key areas.  However, Bramley does not have the same level of infrastructure as Overton and Whitchurch, and is also a much more rural location.  This point has been made repeatedly to BDBC by both the Parish Council and Cllr Tomblin over the last few years.
  • How long will it be for the Local Plan to be in place?  The current timetable suggests that it should be in place in spring 2016.  He noted that the emerging NDP for Bramley is hoped to be finalised by the summer of 2016.
  • Do the Strawberry Fields and The Street developments count towards the 200 houses that the emerging Local Plan states that Bramley must meet?  Cllr Durrant stated that BDBC officers have stated that the Minchens Lane development will meet this requirement, and that the two new developments will be surplus to this requirement.
  • Will finalising the Local Plan have any retrospective impact on these applications?  Cllr Durrant stated that it will not – once permission is given, it will not be overturned by the Local Plan being adopted.
  • Is there are risk that objections placed on grounds of lack of infrastructure will result in new infrastructure being put in place, thus losing the rural character of the village?  Cllr Durrant acknowledged that this is a small risk – however, roads around the village do no lend themselves to being improved due to the way the village has already developed.
  • Will the Campbell Road roundabout be linked up with the Strawberry Fields development?  Cllr Durrant observed that HCC have confirmed that the fourth exit at the roundabout is for farm access to the fields.  He also acknowledged that the Stratfield Saye Estate have been open in their desire to sell land for development.  Cllr Ansell note that SSE received money from the sale of land for developing the roundabout.
  • What is the total impact of the various proposed developments on Bramley, particularly with regards to roads and the general community?  Cllr Durrant observed that the two new developments would have a considerable impact in these areas.  He observed that all planning applications are considered by BDBC in isolation.  Bramley PC need to work with BDBC to highlight the total impact, and have been consistently doing this for some years.  Local residents can also make these points when responding to planning applications.
  • Will development change the rural character of the village and make it more of a district centre, like Whitchurch?  It was generally felt that it could, although councillors were unsure of the exact definition of a district centre – this will be checked.
  • What is planned for s.106 and CIL funding?  Cllr Durrant stated that Bramley PC does not usually have any input on how this is allocated.  It is usually done at borough and county level.  There is evidence that such funding is often spent in other areas of the Borough.  Bramley PC will make a strong case for funding to be spent in the parish, but cannot guarantee that this will be the case.  This is another issue that can be raised by residents when commenting on planning applications.
  • The number of allocated car parking spaces for the developments was noted.  Areas locally are already gridlocked at peak times, and new developments will exacerbate this problem.
  • Are the two new applications within the settlement boundary, and can local services cope with the expansion?  Cllr Durrant confirmed that they are not, and further observed that the local school is already near to capacity.  Children in the area have to travel outside of the parish for secondary education, which puts further pressure on traffic.  The doctors’ surgery is being expanded as part of the Minchens Lane development.
  • Will the local MP support protests against development in the parish?  Cllr Durrant stated that the MP’s stance is currently unknown, but he has proposed a meeting with members of the NDP working group.  Cllr Durrant noted that residents can also communicate directly with the MP – Clerk to place details on how to contact him and BDBC on the PC website.

Cllr Ansell asked if the recent petition against further development can by submitted by the PC.  The Clerk stated that it may be better to submit independently, although the PC will reference it.  It was noted by residents that a recent petition elsewhere resulted in each signature being counted as an individual comment, and therefore petitions are better being submitted independently.  Cllr Durrant emphasised that residents should take an active part in all relevant Borough Council meetings.

h.

15/02708/OUT – Land To The North Of Sherfield Road Bramley

Outline application for residential development of up to 50 dwellings, including affordable housing with associated access, highway works, drainage works (SUDS), public open space, landscaping and any other associated infrastructure with all matters reserved except for means of access

Cllr Durrant observed that that the PC needs to be thorough in review of applications so that detailed objections can be made.

  • Planning Statement – development will be in 2 hectares, due to part of the whole site being a flood zone.  It was noted that earlier consultations with residents and the PC was with regards to 200 dwellings rather than 50.  The PC will emphasise that any more than 50 homes will be directly in flood zones.
  • Play areas – these open areas are all in the flood zone, and as such cannot be guaranteed to be always available.  It was noted that the developers state that there is no evidence of ground water flooding; Bramley PC believe there is clear evidence and this point should be made.
  • Rural environment – the development will result in a significant loss of good agricultural land.  Whilst it is not public open space it does contribute to appearance of openness in village.
  • Roads – the application notes that the C32 is a ‘main arterial route’ – Bramley PC would contest that this is not the case – B roads and above are so, C roads are not.
  • BDBC policies – the application states that the area is within the settlement boundary – it is not.  It states that it would contribute to the well-being of the residents – Bramley PC would contest this point.  It should be stressed that whilst Bramley has been identified as a prime area for development, it has already met the 200 house quota with the Minchens Lane development.
  • Conservation Area – the site is immediately adjacent to a big Conservation Area in Bramley, and as such will directly impact on it and the open views from the village.
  • Local amenities – the application notes the current amenities such as the shop, railway station, baker, etc.  However, Bramley PC feel that these are not enough to support 4000 plus residents.
  • Small scale employment – some is supported.  However it attracts people commuting in and does not employ many locals.  This is unlikely to change.
  • Consultation – the application notes liaison with BDBC and Bramley PC.  However, Bramley PC and the local community received minimal consultation, and that was for a 200 dwelling application, not a 50 dwelling application.
  • The site was not allocated in the emerging Local Plan as a possible site for development, as it was considered unsuitable due to the flood plain.
  • The application notes that the site is logical contiguous site for new growth – the PC felt that this was not the case and will ask for clarification.
  • Public transport – there is no significant bus service in the parish.  There are signed cycle routes along the C32 and Cufaude Lane; however, these are busy routes for traffic, and therefore not ideal for cyclists.
  • There are physical and environmental restraints on infrastructure; roads cannot be made wider, difficult to improve public tansport, difficult to increase school spaces.
  • The application states that the development would create a ‘gateway’ into Bramley.  The PC felt that this was not needed, and would not improve the entrance into the village, and would certainly not improve open space in the village.
  • Affordable housing – the application notes this.  Cllr Durrant noted that Bramley’s need is met by the Minchens Lane development.  It was noted by residents that some affordable housing at the German Road development is not occupied, and that they could therefore not see the need for more affordable housing in Bramley.
  • Landscaping – the developer notes that this will enhance biodiversity.  Bramley PC find it hard to see how this would be the case.
  • Car parking spaces – the application allows 144 spaces for 50 dwellings.  This is unlikely to be enough, particularly given Bramley’s existing parking issues.
  • Exit onto C32 – it was noted that the farm gate will be widened to give two lane entry to development.  This is not far from a blind bend, on the C32, and is near other busy junctions.  Queues at the level crossing will cause problems with this junction.
  • It was noted that the application had been exempted from needing an SEIA.  The recent SEIA carried out for the NDP noted that minimal development in the area was the most desirable outcome due to the lack of infrastructure.  Any development after the stipulated 200 should need to carry out an SEIA.  This will be referenced in response.
  • Traffic assessment – it was questioned by the PC whether the assessment was a sensible projection, particularly with regard to the additional traffic flow, and the traffic avoiding the level crossing.

It was unanimously agreed that Cllr Durrant should draft a response to the application and circulate to councillors for comment.  Once finalised, it will be submitted to BDBC, and placed on the Bramley Parish Council and NDP websites.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr Durrant

Clerk

i.

15/02682/OUT – Land Adjacent The Street Bramley

Outline planning permission for up to 49 market dwellings and 33 affordable dwellings, together with associated open space, landscaping and new site access at land to the south of The Street, Bramley

Cllr Durrant outlined the general application, and noted a lack of professionalism in application.

  • Cllr Ansell noted the extremely limited community engagement.
  • It was noted that this application overstates the infrastructure in Bramley, and that many of the same points apply to this as to Strawberry Fields.
  • It was noted that this site is part of the proposed strategic gap between Basingstoke and Bramley.  Bramley PC to clarify this.  The site is definitely outside the settlement boundary.
  • There will be no access from this development to Cufaude Lane – it will be directly onto The Street.  However, during busy periods Cufaude Lane often has traffic flow problems, which impact directly onto the Street.  This development will be directly affected by such issues.
  • The exit from Churchlands is already very awkward – this development will exacerbate the problem.
  • The application adheres to the 40% affordable housing quota.  It was noted that the site is somewhat isolated from the centre of the village, which could cause problems for those requiring public transport.
  • It was noted that references in the application to the Conservation Area were incorrect, and should be pointed out in the PC response.
  • The application does not take the proposed development at Razors Farm into account, nor the probable future development of Upper Cufaude Farm.  The cumulative effect of these developments needs to be noted in the response.
  • A traffic assessment is referenced in the application; however there is no supporting documentation.
  • It was questioned whether the Bramley Army Encampment blast zone has been taken into account.  This should be checked.

It was unanimously agreed that Cllr Marshall should draft a response and circulate for comment.  Once finalised, it will be submitted to BDBC, and placed on the Bramley Parish Council and NDP websites.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr Marshall

Clerk

4. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 16th September at 7.30pm, in the Bramley Room at the Village Hall.

 

Meeting closed at 21.55.