Agenda and minutes

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 3 October 2018 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

The minutes of the meeting which took place on 3 October 2018 were confirmed 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.

Members are advised that in order for a substitute to be arranged, a Member must give four clear working days notice of their apologies. For this meeting, the latest date apologies can be given for a substitute to be arranged is 23 October 2018.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Val Henry, John Gray, John Ward, Brian Adams and Nick Williams.

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.

Councillor Mike Band declared a non –pecuniary interest in the applications on the agenda as he was a member of Surrey Hills Area of Natural Beauty Board.

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 had already been circulated this month at 3 October meeting and there are no new updated statistics available at present.

The performance report was noted.

Proposal

Approval of reserved matters for 132 dwellings (Appearance, Layout and Scale) for development for residential use pursuant to planning permission WA/2017/1346 (to reflect revised access arrangements to outline permission WA/2014/1054). (This is a subsequent application under the EIA Regulations, and is accompanied by a Statement of Conformity) (As amended by plans and information received 1/10/2018 and 16/09/2018)

Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION A

That, the Reserved Matters of Layout, Scale and Appearance be APPROVED, subject to conditions 1-14 and informatives 1-9.

RECOMMENDATION B

That details pursuant to the following be approved:

•           Conditions 7 (surface water drainage), 8 (foul water drainage) and 10         (Drainage strategy) of WA/2017/1346

•           The S106 Agreement requirements in respect of Affordable Housing for    WA/2017/1346 (as required by clause1.1 of  schedule 2).

•           The S106 Agreement requirement in respect of SANG for WA/2017/1346 (as        required by clause 3.3 of schedule 2).

•           The S106 Agreement requirement in respect of Play Area for WA/2017/1346        (as required by clause 3.1 of Schedule 2).

•           The S106 Agreement requirement in respect of Open Space for     WA/2017/1346 (as required by Clause 3.2.1 of Schedule 2).

Proposed development

Approval of reserved matters for 132 dwellings (Appearance, Layout and Scale) for development for residential use pursuant to planning permission WA/2017/1346

With reference to the report circulated with the agenda, Officers presented a summary of the planning context for making a decision on the application, and then outlined the proposed development including site plans and the layout. Officers outlined the determining issues and those matters of a more subjective nature.

The Committee noted that since the agenda report had been published, there had been a response from Natural England, raising no objection to the reserved matters in light of the specific clauses within the S106. There had been further comments from the applicants/agent and officers had made a number of amendments to the conditions which were detailed in the update sheet.

The Committee was reminded that outline planning permission for the erection of a35 dwellings together with associated development including hard and soft landscaping, access roads including partial demolition of retaining walls, public open space, dedicated woodland and permanent footways and the upgrading of existing footpath to a pedestrian/cycle link (PROW No.35), had already been approved under lanning application WA/2014/1054 and that this was a material consideration.

Public speaking

In accordance with the Council’s arrangements for public participation at meetings, the following made representations in respect of the application, which were duly considered:

Robert Lane - Objector

Andrew Stainsby - Applicant/Agent

Debate

The Committee considered the proposal and asked about the removal of trees which the public speaker had eluded to. Officers advised that trees had been removed, including an oak tree but none of these were subject to tree preservation orders.

There was concern expressed about the separation distances and the elevations to nearby properties. Officers advised that whilst there would be a minor shortfall with regard to distances between some dwellings, Officers were satisfied that overall the proposed dwellings would provide a good standard of accommodation for future residents having regard to proposed separation distances, light, outlook, privacy and size of accommodation. Officers were also satisfied that the harm to the setting of the near by Listed Buildings would be no greater than that previously accepted as part of the grant of outline permission and that the public benefits of the proposal would outweigh the less than substantial harm.

The Committee was pleased to note that the application provided 40% of affordable homes. Furthermore, the provision of car parking spaces for residents and visitors met the Council’s guidelines.

At the conclusion of the debate, the Chairman moved to the recommendations in the update sheet. Recommendation A there were 15 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions so it was carried. The vote for recommendation was 17 in favour and 1 abstention so was also carried. 

Decisions

Decision A:

That the Reserved Matters of Layout, Scale and Appearance be Approved, subject to Conditions 2, 5-7, 9-12 and 14, as set out on pages 52-58 of the agenda report, amended Condition 1 as per the second update sheet,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

Proposal

Application under Section 73 to vary Conditions 2, 3, 5 & 8 of WA/2016/2456 (conditions relate to approved plan numbers, access, turning and parking) to allow change to affordable housing provision, addition of conservatories to Plots 1, 3, 38, 40 and 43, alterations to layout and amendments to Plots 34 and 35 to alter from semi-detached to detached dwellings.

Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION A

That permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions 1-25 and informative 1-4 outlined in the agenda report.

RECOMMENDATION B

That, in the event the requirements of recommendation A are not met within 6 months of the resolution, permission be REFUSED for the reason outlined in the agenda report.

Proposed development

Application under Section 73 to vary Conditions 2, 3, 5 & 8 of WA/2016/2456 (conditions relate to approved plan numbers, access, turning and parking) to allow change to affordable housing provision, addition of conservatories to Plots 1, 3, 38, 40 and 43, alterations to layout and amendments to Plots 34 and 35 to alter from semi-detached to detached dwellings.

With reference to the report circulated with the agenda, Officers presented a summary of the planning context for making a decision on the application, and then outlined the proposed development including site plans and the layout. Officers outlined the determining issues and those matters of a more subjective nature.

The Committee noted that the application had been brought to the Committee at the request of the Head of Planning. It was noted that the principle of development had been established by the granting of planning permission WA/2016/2456 at appeal. And, whilst the applicant is applying for a variation of Conditions 2, 3, 5 and 8 of that permission, under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), the proposal was, in effect, a fresh application for the entire development, albeit with a variation to Conditions 2, 3, 5 and 8.

The Committee noted that the appeal decision was issued the day after the adoption of the Waverley Borough Local Plan Part 1 2018 (although the decision notice was corrected 05 March 2018) and it was not recognised in the Inspectors decision that this did not form part of the Development Plan.  He did, however recognise that significant weight should be given to the Local Plan Part 1 and in any event, he found that the proposal was in accordance with this document.

Debate

The Committee considered the application and was very disappointed with the amendments to the provision of affordable housing. Members noted that In allowing the appeal, whilst the Inspector acknowledged the provision of 18 affordable dwellings on the site exceeded the requirements of Policy H5 of the Local Plan 2002 and Policy ANH1 of the Draft Local Plan (Part 1) 2018, he did not attach any material weight to this, nor did he consider this excess a benefit to the scheme that would otherwise outweigh any harm, as he considered the proposal to accord with the Development Plan in all other respects. It therefore follows that the Inspectors decision to allow the scheme would not have differed if 30% affordable housing was secured (in accordance with the draft Local Plan Policy), rather than 43%. Furthermore, the Council’s current Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 sought 30% affordable housing on all development sites and the proposal complies with this requirement.

Members felt that a new application should be submitted as felt that this was materially different. Officers did advise Members against this, as it was a highly material planning consideration that there was an existing permission which could be implemented on site. It would be inappropriate and unreasonable to revisit the principle of the entire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.