Planning Summary – May 2020

Bramley Parish Council

Planning Application comments and decisions – May 2020

AM – Cllr Alan Munday, MB – Cllr Malcolm Bell, EC – Cllr Liz Capel, CF – Cllr Chris Flooks (Chair)

 

  Application Comments Decision and proposed response
1. 20/00319/FUL – Land At Silchester Road Silchester Road Bramley – AMENDED

Erection of 12 no.dwellings, associated access, parking, landscaping and amenity space

CF – Since the Parish last submitted comments on 21 April we have received further information from Thames Water which continues to raise our concerns over the sewage capacity in Bramley. To allow further development whilst Thames Water seems not to understand the sewer flooding issues would be folly.

If these houses are primarily aimed at downsizing seniors why do we need a kickabout area and extra parking?

The site layout seems to be predicated by allowing access to the wider site, possibly for future development.

MB – Removal of Garages:- This is aimed at downsizing of families, the older generation. The site is isolated from the main infrastructure, shops, pub etc of the village, not within easy walking distance for residents, so the older generation will have cars which will contribute to the already over packed road in Bramley. Not only that, the generation aimed at will want their cars protected, and will want garages. After occupation, if it happens, then garages will be built. The exclusion of garages is only a ploy to make the development more appealing to planning department and in no may will meet the demands of possible residents.

Stated before, it is an erosion of the views into and out of the historic Old Bramley centred around St James Church, The Manor House, Exon House.

Again, the infrastructure of Bramley needs considerable improvement to take more housing. The Sewerage infrastructure is of considerable concern with the report from Thames Water, SMG1294 G4027 produced by Thames Water of the 27/10/2014 stating that the foul water infrastructure was incapable of taking but 200 houses from Minchens Lane Development without considerable improvement to increase the capacity of the foul water sewage. This has not happened and as seen with recent weather conditions, there has been foul water spillage downstream of this development into gardens of houses and back flow into houses, all reported. Thames water are reviewing the Sewage Infrastructure with recommendation being available at the earliest 2021. The “No problem” response from Thames water is from consultee office of Thames water who have not taken into account these reports and recommendations, just taken the development in isolation. The e mail of Feb 25th sent to BDBC should be referred to, a copy was at that time sent to the officer in charge.

As reported previously, whist supposedly meeting the need for bungalows in the area, the infrastructure is incapable of coping with more housing without detrimental impact on the quality of life of the existing community.

Reject.

AM – Fully support comments from MB and CF on reasons why this application should be rejected

Objection.

EC – Agree with comments by MB and CF

OBJECTION.

Objection

Sewerage provision – Since the Parish Council last submitted comments on 21st April 2020, further information has been received from Thames Water, which continues to raise Bramley PC concerns about the sewage capacity in Bramley.  The report from Thames Water, SMG1294 G4027 produced by Thames Water of the 27/10/2014 (submitted by Bramley PC as part of its original objection on 4th March 2020) stated that the foul water infrastructure was incapable of taking 200 houses from Minchens Lane Development without considerable improvement to increase the capacity of the foul water sewage. This has not happened, and as seen with recent weather conditions, there has been foul water spillage downstream of this development into gardens of houses and back flow into houses, all reported. Thames water are reviewing the Sewage Infrastructure with recommendation being available at the earliest 2021.  The “No problem” response from Thames water is from consultee office of Thames water who have not taken into account these reports and recommendations, just taken the development in isolation.  The Parish Council also notes that the 2014 report has not been added to the planning portal along with its comments of 4th March, and we therefore attach them again for reference.

Garages – This development is aimed at downsizing families, the older generation. The site is isolated from the main infrastructure, shops, pub etc of the village, and not within easy walking distance for residents, so the potential residents will have cars which will contribute to the already extremely busy roads through and around Bramley.  Further, these potential residents will want their cars protected, and will want garages.  It is likely that if the application is approved, future occupants will build garages.  The exclusion of garages appears to be a ploy to make the development more appealing to planning department and in no way will meet the demands of possible residents.

Open spaces – if the proposed development is aimed at more senior residents, the Parish Council questions why a kickabout space would be required.

Summary – In addition to the objections outlined above, Bramley Parish Council’s previous objections to this application still stand, particularly with regard to the proximity to the Conservation Area and the erosion of views from it.

2. T/00150/20/TCA – Olivers Cottage Bramley Green

Fir 1 – fell as the tree has been dead for a number of years and creaking in the wind and will cause significant damage to property and/or human life if fallen naturally.

Fir 2 – fell as the tree has been dead for a number of years and creaking in the wind and will cause significant damage to property and/or human life if fallen naturally.

Cherry Blossom – Crown lifting to remove branches overhanging garage to ensure no serious damage to property and removing obstruction from driveway (as per annotated photo’s)

Oak tree – Crown Lifting to remove branches overhanging property roof which could cause serious damage to property (as per annotated photos)

CF – Defer to tree officer.

MB – No objection so long as the tree officer agrees with the condition of the trees to be felled and the pruning of the others.

AM – Defer to Tree Warden.

EC – REFER TO TREE WARDEN.

 

 

No objection – defer to Tree Officer.  Note MBs comment about the trees to be felled.
3. 20/01008/FUL – Land At Locksbridge Farm Cufaude Lane

The erection of 1 no. dwelling and associated parking and access

CF – The access onto Cufaude Lane is completely unacceptable. The sight line up the lane towards Bramley is non-existent for traffic exiting the site. This very narrow lane takes approx 1600 vehicles per day and this part of the lane regularly suffers grid lock due to lack of passing places. To say that this access has been regularly used is somewhat economical with the truth. Google street view shows it completely overgrown with nettles.

The site sits near the crest of a south facing ridge some 10 metres above the level of the low point of Cufaude Lane  and 12 metres above the low point of Vyne Road. Couple this with the 7 metre height and full height glazing and this will be particularly intrusive when approaching the village from the south.  This building would also significantly block the view from, and overlook Ridgewell. It will also further the “ribbon development” along Cufaude Lane.

This property is outside the SPB and must thus be considered a house in the countryside according to SS6. There is no demonstrated local need for this and indeed, Bramley has fulfilled its quota of “at least 200” dwellings by hosting 315 in 3 major developments. It must also be considered isolated due to the nature of Cufaude Lane. The inspector at the recent planning enquiry into traveller sites on Cufaude Lane agreed with this observation.

The Bramley NDP appears to have no mention at all and considering the time and effort expended in its preparation I find this insulting.

MB – This is an application for housing outside the settlement policy boundary, and whilst there is no 5 year land availability, which is a point the applicant is playing on, it is not in accord with policy SS6 of the Local Plan or with Policy H1 of the Neighbourhood plan which is in accord with the local plan. Policy SS6 states, a) i) Development will only be permitted if it does not result in an isolated development. This site is isolated from Bramley with access onto a very narrow country road which is also part of the cycle network. Access onto the road can only be made parallel to Cufaude Lane from a northerly direction at a passing point for vehicles using the lane.

The application states it is a contribution to the housing need of the Borough. Bramley has contributed 315 houses towards the housing need of the borough over the past 3 yrs and this development will contribute an unnecessary house whilst being an eye soar in the countryside.

It states it is a sustainable development, meeting Economic, social and environmental needs. Economically, the building of one house is not going to economically benefit Bramley. Social, it is an isolated plot outside the SPB. Environmental, no contribution in that it will erode the historic environment which is farming environment and open views of the countryside to the Vyne which lies to the SW of this site.

The developer is playing on the 5 year land availability without any consideration to the setting of Bramley Village, the danger it will cause down cafaude Lane. Playing on the part that it contributes to the housing shortage. Bramley does not have a housing shortage and cannot take more housing without considerable improvement to the Infrastructure.

Application has to be refused.

AM – I think MB and CF have clearly articulated the issues with this planning application and I fully support their comments.

Objection.

EC – Agree with comments by MB and CF.

OBJECTION.

Objection

This is an application for housing outside the settlement policy boundary (SPB), and whilst there is no 5 year land availability, it is not in accord with policy SS6 of the Local Plan or with Policy H1 of the Neighbourhood Plan.

Policy SS6 states that ‘Development will only be permitted if it does not result in an isolated development.’  This site is isolated from Bramley with access onto a very narrow country road which is also part of the cycle network.  Access onto the road can only be made parallel to Cufaude Lane from a northerly direction at a passing point for vehicles using the lane.  It should be noted that the sight line up the lane towards Bramley is non-existent for traffic exiting the site.  Further, Cufaude Lane is a narrow county lane which takes approximately 1600 vehicles per day, and regularly suffers from gridlock due to the lack of passing places.  Bramley Parish Council also questions the statement that the access point is regularly used – Google street view shows it completely overgrown with nettles, just last summer.

The application states that the proposed building would be a contribution to the housing needs of the Borough.  Bramley has contributed 315 houses towards the housing need of the Borough over the past 3 year, and this development will contribute an unnecessary house outside the SPB.  It should be noted that a recent planning enquiry for a nearby site agreed that Bramley had more than fulfilled its quota for new dwellings.

The application also states that it is a sustainable development, meeting economic, social, and environmental needs.  However, the building of one dwelling will make little difference to the economy in Bramley.  As noted before, the plot is isolated and outside the SPB, so adds little to the social needs of Bramley.  Environmentally speaking the plot is surrounded by farmland, with open views to the Vyne to the SW of the site.  Therefore, there would be a detriment to the local environment as well.

The site sits near the crest of a south facing ridge some 10 metres above the level of the low point of Cufaude Lane, and 12 metres above the low point of Vyne Road. This together with the proposed 7 metre height and full height glazing will make building particularly intrusive when approaching the village from the south.  The proposed building will also significantly block the view from and overlook Ridgewell.  It will also further the “ribbon development” along Cufaude Lane, one of the more rural parts of Bramley.

Bramley Parish Council notes that the developer is highlighting the 5 year land availability for the Borough.  However, no consideration has been given to the setting of Bramley Village, and the danger the access point will cause in Cufaude Lane.  Furthermore, no consideration appears to have been given to the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan, and little to the BDBC Local Plan.

4. 20/01036/FUL – Bramley Village Hall The Street Bramley

Resurfacing of existing car park serving Bramley Village Hall, including the improvement of drainage and rainwater management on the site

CF – No objection.

MB – No objection.

AM – No objections from me.

EC – NO OBJECTION.

No objection
5. 20/01037/HSE – The Old Farmhouse 4 Razors Farm Doric Avenue Chineham

Erection of store to rear of existing garage

CF – No objection.

MB – No objection again so long as the material used are in keeping with the existing structure.

AM – No objections from me.

EC – NO OBJECTION.

No objection

Note MBs comment

6. 20/01086/HSE – Orchard View Sherfield Road Bramley

Erection of two single storey side extensions and a single storey rear extension

CF – Interestingly the B&D GIS mapping shows this as ROSINA.

This seems to be an overdevelopment of the site with barely 20 cms of space on each side. Do eaves and gutters overhang the boundary? How do you build it let alone maintain it?

MB – in agreement with comments from other committee members.

AM – Seems to be an overdevelopment of the site right up to boundaries and thereby giving no access to rear of property except through the house.

Objection.

EC – A large extension taking up the full width of the plot and going right up to both neighbours boundaries. No access from front garden to back garden apart from through the house. Privacy issue for one neighbour in particular.

OBJECTION.

Objection

The proposed extensions appear to be a huge overdevelopment of the site, with barely 20cm of space on each side.  It is possible that eaves and gutters will overhang the boundary.  There would also be no access to the rear of the property except through the house.  Further, there will be privacy issues for neighbouring properties.