Agenda and minutes

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 19 September 2018 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

The Minutes of the meeting held on 19 September 2018 were approved and signed.

To receive apologies for absence.

Where a Member of the Committee is unable to attend a meeting, a substitute Member from the same Area Planning Committee may attend, speak and vote in their place for that meeting.

Apologies for abence had been received from Councillors Mike Band, Mary Foryszewski, Michael Goodridge, David Hunter, Val Henry, and Stephen Mulliner.

Cllr Patricia Ellis attended as a substitute.

To receive from Members declarations of interests in relation to any items included on the Agenda for this meeting in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.

There were no declarations in connection with items on the agenda.

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public of which notice has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 10.

There were none.

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from Members in accordance with Procedure Rule 11.

There were none.

Planning Performance and the Government target on quality on planning decision making will now be a standard item on the Joint Planning Committee agenda. This was an agreed recommendation at Executive on 28 November 2017 and is part of the Development Management Service Improvement Plan.

The latest available statistics are attached.

The Council’s performance against Government planning targets was noted.

Proposal

Amendment to Condition 5 of planning permission ref. no. WA/2018/0544 restricting works on main East Street redevelopment permission (WA/2012/0912 and WA/2016/0268) from commencing until dual lane bridge is constructed to allow the demoliton of Brightwell Cottage in advance of the bridge construction

Recommendation

That the non-material amendment application be approved subject to amended Condition 5 as follows:

Proposal

Amendment to Condition 5 of Planning Permission ref. no. WA/2018/0544 restricting works on main East Street redevelopment permission (WA/2012/0912 and WA/2016/0268) from commencing until dual lane bridge is constructed to allow the demolition of Brightwell Cottage in advance of the bridge construction.

With reference to the report circulated with the agenda, Officers explained that this application was for a Non Material Amendment (NMA) to the planning permission (WA/2018/0544) for the dual lane construction bridge associated with the East Street redevelopment scheme, approved by the Committee on 9 July 2018. The amendment to Condition 5 would bring the planning permission into line with the agreed phasing plan for the main redevelopment scheme, and specifically enable Brightwell Cottage to be demolished prior to the completion of the construction bridge.

Officers confirmed that the latest bat survey for Brightwell Cottage, undertaken 20  September 2018, had not identified any maternity roosts, only day roosts; a Natural England licence had been issued on this basis. If maternity roosts were subsequently found during the pre-demolition and demolition processes, work would cease and Natural England would be contacted. The pole-mounted bat boxes provided would be acceptable mitigation for the species of bat previously evidenced on the site.

In response to a query raised earlier in the day by Cllr Hyman, Officers presented a revised recommendation, requiring the applicants to demonstrate that they had an interest in the land subject of the NMA application before the NMA application would be approved.

Debate

Cllr James had no objection to the NMA, but asked that it be made clear in the conditions that the demolition material from Brightwell Cottage must be stockpiled on the site until it could be removed via the construction bridge.

In response to Members’ question on process, Officers confirmed that the NMA application for the revised phasing plans had been agreed by the Joint Planning Committee on 30 July 2018, and they were satisfied that the applicant had the necessary interest for that application to be approved. That NMA had been in relation to the permission for the main redevelopment scheme, whereas the NMA now being considered by the Committee was in relation to the bridge planning permission.

Cllr Hyman raised a number of points in relation to EIA and the impacts of the main redevelopment scheme. He proposed that the decision on this NMA be deferred for further information. There was no seconder to the proposal.

Officers advised the Committee that the NMA application was in relation to the planning permission for the dual lane bridge, which was not an EIA application. The NMA was a minor amendment and Officers were satisfied that there was no need for an EIA in the wider context of the development. Cllr Hyman’s queries related to the main redevelopment scheme permission which had been subject to an EIA which was found to be acceptable. The Council was satisfied that the decisions were lawful then, and now.

The Committee noted that the wording of the NMA before them had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.