Agenda and minutes

Area Planning Committee (Western)
Wednesday, 6th June, 2018 7.15 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, The Burys, Godalming

Contact: Ema Dearsley  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

1.

Appointment of Chairman

To confirm the appointment of Councillor Peter Isherwood as Chairman of the Committee for the Council Year 2018-2019.

Minutes:

Councillor Peter Isherwood was confirmed as Chairman of the Western Area Planning Committee for the Council Year 2018-19.

2.

Appointment of Vice-Chairman

To confirm the appointment of Councillor Carole Cockburn as Vice-Chairman of the Committee for the Council Year 2018-2019.

Minutes:

Councillor Carole Cockburn was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Western Area Planning Committee for the Council Year 2018-19.

3.

Minutes

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 May 2018 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting that took place on 9 May 2018 were confirmed and signed.

4.

Apologies for Absence

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

There were apologies for absence from Councillors Pat Frost, Stephen Hill, Peter Isherwood and Martin Lear.

5.

Disclosure of Interests

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.

Minutes:

All Farnham Town Councillors declared a non-pecuniary interest with the application on the agenda.

6.

Any Relevant Updates to Government Guidance or Legislation Since the Last Meeting

Officers to update the Committee on any changes to the planning environment of which they should be aware when making decisions.

Minutes:

Steve Weaver, the Development Control Manager, updated Members on the new system of applying for planning permission which came into effect at the start of that month. It applied to development where the “main purpose” was housing but some non-residential development may also be proposed as part of a housing-led mix. This application procedure was restricted to minor development comprising a maximum of up to nine dwellings, floorspace of under 1,000 sq. m or a site area of less than one hectare.

 

The application process was essentially a two stage one:

           Permission in Principle (PiP) stage – where the LPA settled the question of whether the site was suitable for development in principle and how much development the site was suitable for. An application for PiP must express the proposed development as a range and only need be accompanied by a form and a location plan.

           Technical details consent (TDC) stage – where the LPA assessed the detailed scheme.

 

In some respects the process was not dissimilar to the current process of an Outline Planning Application with all matters reserved, followed by a Reserved Matters application for details relating to appearance, means of access, landscaping, layout and scale which would continue to exist. However, the LPA had a much shorter time period to determine PiP and TDC applications, just five weeks for each, and the scope of the consideration of the initial PiP application was limited to matters of location, land use and amount of development only – all other matters being considered at the TDC stage.

 

In terms of public engagement, LPAs were required to advertise PiP applications only by displaying a site notice on or near the site and advising that representations must be made within a period of not later than 14 days. Whilst there was no statutory requirement to write to adjoining residents, it had been agreed with the Portfolio Holder that they would do so – but again they could only give a 14 day response period.

 

Given the challenging timescales in play, as well as adding applications to the weekly Planning lists in the normal way, officers would be notifying ward councillors and Town/Parish Councils directly on receipt of any PiP application in order that they could quickly appraise themselves of the case and any queries they might have.

 

As mentioned above, the time period for a decision on a PiP was five weeks from the date of receipt. If the applicant was willing, it was possible to agree an extension of time to the determination period. (NB The current period for the determination of planning applications of this nature is eight weeks). PiP applications could be refused and, if this was the case, this refusal could be appealed. If a decision was not made within the prescribed five weeks period there was no automatic permission although the applicant could appeal on the basis of a non-determination.

 

In terms of referrals to Committee, whilst it would be possible for a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Performance Against Government Targets

Planning Performance and the Government target on quality on planning decision making will now be a standard item on the Area 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 will be noted in the update sheet.

Minutes:

The Committee noted the update on performance against Government Targets.

8.

Applications for Planning Permission

Background Papers

 

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to reports are listed under the “Representations” heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading “Background Papers”.

 

The implications for crime, disorder and community safety have been appraised in the following applications but it is not considered that any consideration of that type arises unless it is specifically referred to in a particular report.

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the applications for planning permission be determined as set out below.

8.1

A1 - WA/2018/0466 - 18 West End Grove, Farnham GU9 7EG pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Proposal

Erection of single storey side and two storey rear extension

 

Recommendation

That, subject to conditions 1-5 and informative 1, permission be GRANTED

 

Minutes:

Proposal

Erection of single storey side and two storey rear extension

 

Decision

RESOLVED that, against officer recommendation that the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

 

1.    The proposal, by reason of its scale, siting and positioning of windows will have an unacceptable impact on the adjoining occupiers at 11 and 12 Parfitt’s Close by reason of perceived loss of privacy and on the adjoining occupier at 16 West End Grove by reason of loss of outlook and overbearing impact. The proposal would conflict with policy TD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 1) 2018, Policy FNP16 of the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan 2017 and Retained Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and paragraph 17 of the NPPF.

 

[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:

 

Tom Wasilewki – Objector

George Hesse - Supporter]

 

 

8.2

B1 - WA/2017/2223 - Land To The Rear Of Substation Off Wrecclesham Hill, Wrecclesham GU10 4JX pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Proposal

Construction of an energy storage facility and associated works (as amended by plans received 19/03/2018 and as amplified by information received 27/03/18 and 16/05/18)

 

 

Recommendation

That, subject to conditions 1-9 and informatives 1-4, permission be GRANTED.

Minutes:

Proposal

Construction of an energy storage facility and associated works (as amended by plans received 19/03/2018 and as amplified by information received 27/03/18 and 16/05/18).

 

Decision

RESOLVED that, subject to conditions 1-9 and informatives 1-4, permission be APPROVED.