Agenda and minutes

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 8 June 2015 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

The minutes of the meeting held on 8 June were confirmed as a correct record.

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.

There were apologies from Councillors Peter Isherwood and Liz Wheatley. Councillor Jim Edwards 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.

A non-pecuniary interest was declared by all Members of Farnham Town Council.

There were no matters falling within this category.

The background papers relating to the following items are as set out in the reports included in the original agenda papers.

Proposed Development

Non Material Amendment application for Amendment to Condition 16 of WA/2012/0911 in order to allow certain works identified to take place under planning permission WA/2012/0912 for the main site, prior to the construction of the temporary vehicular bridge and associated access works granted under planning permission WA/2012/0911 at  land at East Street  Farnham (as amended by letter dated 19/05/2015 and plans received 19/05/2015)

Recommendation

That the amendment to Condition 16 of WA/2012/0911 be APPROVED.

Proposed development

Non Material Amendment application for Amendment to Condition 16 of WA/2012/0911 in order to allow certain works identified to take place under planning permission WA/2012/0912 for the main site, prior to the construction of the temporary vehicular bridge and associated access works granted under planning permission WA/2012/0911 at  land at East Street  Farnham

The Chairman introduced the Officers present and referred Members to the proposed order of business for the meeting.

With reference to the report circulated with the agenda, Officers presented a summary of the planning history of the site, and the current plans and proposals. Officers showed pictures of the site and plans for the application. Officers outlined the matters of principle/technical judgement and those matters of judgement and advised members of information received following the agenda being published and detailed in the update sheet. This included an additional consultation response from Farnham Town Council and 88 additional letters of representation but these had not raised any new material considerations.

Officers advised the Committee that the application was for a non material amendment to condition 16 of planning permission WA/2012/1911 which was for the provision of temporary construction access to the A31, comprising of a bridge across the River Wey, pedestrian underpass, other supporting infrastructure and re-instatement works including re-siting of the proposed footbridge across the River Wey from that approved under WA/2008/0279. The proposal intended to allow a material operation to be carried out, to implement planning permission WA/2012/0912 to allow the demolition works to be undertaken without the provision and use of the temporary construction access bridge. Members noted that Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allowed a non-material amendment to be made to an existing planning permission via a simple application procedure with a quick decision time. The NPPG also confirmed that, pursuant to Section 96A(4), a person with an interest in the land could apply for a non-material amendment.

Following the officers presentation and before the Committee debated the application, in accordance with the guidance for public participation at meetings, each party was given the opportunity to speak for up to 5 minutes. The following people spoke to the application:

Jerry Hyman - Objector

Cllr John Ward – Farnham Town Council

Bruce McAllistair - Applicant/Agent

Having heard the officers’ presentation as well as the representations from the objectors and the applicant and supporter, Members were invited to ask any further questions or to seek clarification on areas of concern from the officers.

The Committee raised concern about the length of time it had taken the applicants to build the bridge and were disappointed that they were put in this position of agreeing a NMA so that there could be a further delay to the development of the site. Members raised concern about the extra movements onto the site as a result of this proposal and the affect this would have on air quality and traffic movement, particularly along South Street. Officers confirmed that the proposal for the demolition  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.