Agenda, decisions and minutes

WESTERN Planning - Tuesday, 19th January, 2021 6.00 pm

Contact: Kimberly Soane  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

127.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTES

To receive any apologies for absence and substitutes.

 

Where a Member of the Committee is unable to attend a substitute Member may attend, speak and vote in their place at that meeting.

 

Members are advised that in order for a substitute to be arranged a Member must give four (4) clear working days notice of their apologies.

 

For this meeting the latest date apologies can be given for a substitute to be arranged is Tuesday 12th January 2021

 

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Cllr Anna James.

128.

MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

To approve the Minutes of the meeting, held on 22nd December 2020 and published on the Council’s website, as correct record of the meeting.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 22nd December and published on the Council’s Website were agreed as a correct record.

129.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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:

There were no declarations of interest made for items on the agenda.

130.

QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public in accordance with Procedure Rule 10.

 

Submission of questions must be received by Tuesday 12th January 2021.

 

Minutes:

There were no questions from members of the public received.

131.

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

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

 

Submission of questions must be received by Tuesday 12th January 2021.

 

Minutes:

There were no questions from members received.

132.

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:

Officers provided two updates for noting:

 

1)    In December 2020 there was a high court judgment where the judge quashed the grant of a planning permission for 73 dwellings near a heritage asset. It was found that an officer report considered by the planning committee seriously and materially misled the committee. Ultimately although there were two other unsuccessful points of challenge one point succeeded.

 

The judge found that the officer did not advise members on how they were required to apply the duty, under section 661 of the planning listed buildings and conservation areas act 1990, in respect of the balancing exercise.

 

In a previous case (Barnwell) it had been found that section 661 imposes a duty to treat a finding of harm to a listed building as a consideration to which the decision maker must give considerable importance and weight when carrying out the balancing exercise. It is not open to the decision maker to give the harm such weight as he or she sees fit.

 

In this particular Guildford case the officer was found to have made repeated errors of advising members to undertake an un-tilted balancing exercise weighing the less than substantial harm to the heritage assets against the public benefits of the proposal without apparently taking into account the requirement to attribute considerable importance and weight to a finding of harm and providing clear and convincing justification for this harm.

 

The judge concluded that, had the committee known they should attribute such weight to the identified harm, they could have come to a different decision and the decision was therefore quashed.

 

2)    Members were reminded that there is a current government consultation entitled ‘Supporting Housing Delivery and Public Service Infrastructure’. The deadline for reporting the outcome of the consultation to government is the end of the month. Officers are currently coordinating the response to this. in terms of two appeals that have generated some attention in the last week.

 

Lower Weybourne Lane -  due to a technological area error Waverley Borough Council did not receive the start date letter for this appeal. Subsequently the letter has been re-issued with a start date and an altered timetable but currently we are still aiming for a public inquiry in March.

 

In terms of the Woolmead, officers advised that a notification has been received that an appeal has been lodged but we are awaiting a start date from the inspectorate.

 

133.

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

Background Papers

 

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 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.

 

134.

APPLICATIONS DECIDED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

Officers to advise the Committee of any applications decided under the new delegated power, in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Ward councillor(s).

Minutes:

No items have been decided under delegated powers since the last meeting.

135.

TPO 12/20 - Confirmation of TPO 12/2020 - Copper Beech at 6 College Hill, Haslemere pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Purpose

 

To consider the objection to making of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 12/2020 and to determine whether the Order should be confirmed, with or without modification. The report has no direct resource implications. There are environmental benefits in retaining the tree which merits special protection.

 

Recommendation

 

That, Tree Preservation Order 12/2020 be CONFIRMED without modification.

Decision:

 

Tree Preservation Order 12/2020 CONFIRMED without modification

Minutes:

To consider the objection to making of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 12/2020 and to determine whether the Order should be confirmed, with or without modification. The report has no direct resource implications. There are environmental benefits in retaining the tree which merits special protection.

 

Decision

 

Tree Preservation Order 12/2020 CONFIRMED without modification

136.

APPLICATIONS SUBJECT TO PUBLIC SPEAKING

137.

A1 - WA/2020/1356 - Land at 1&2 Old Dairy Cottages, Hillside Farm, Churt pdf icon PDF 531 KB

Proposal

 

Erection of 2 detached dwellings and associated works following demolition of 2 existing bungalows

 

Recommendation

 

That, subject to conditions 1-18 and Informatives 1-3,permission be GRANTED

Decision:

Planning permission REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

·         Loss of amenity to neighbours

·         ANOB conflict in line with the Surrey Hill Management Plan.

 

Exact wording to be agreed by Chairman and Ward Councillors.

 

 

Minutes:

Erection of 2 detached dwellings and associated works following demolition of 2 existing bungalows

 

The report was considered by the committee.

 

Public Speaking

 

In accordance with the Council’s public speaking scheme, the following made representations which were duly considered:

 

Mr & Mrs Warren/ Mr Turner (Sharing speaker) – Object

 

Chris Wilmshurst (Agent) – Support

 

Cllr Julia Potts – Ward Councillor

 

The recommendation to grant planning permission subject to conditions 1-18 and Informatives 1-3, was overturned by a vote of 2 in favour, 10 against and no abstentions.

 

An alternative recommendation to refuse the application was proposed by Cllr Brian Adams, seconded by Cllr Carole Cockburn and was carried by a vote of 11 in favour, none against and one abstention.

 

Decision

 

Planning permission REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

1.    The proposal by reason of its siting would result in an unacceptable overbearing impact to the neighbouring property of 2 Arvon Cottages. The proposal would conflict with Policy TD1 of the Local Plan 2018, retained Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Plan 2002 and Paragraph 127 of the NPPF 2019.

 

2.    Owing to the extensive glazing of the proposed dwellings, the proposal would cause unacceptable light pollution that would materially detract from the distinctive character of the AONB. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy RE3 of the Local Plan 2018 and the Surrey Hills AONB Management Plan 2020-2025.

138.

A2 - WA/2020/0772 - Land Rear of 9 Upper South View, Farnham, GU9 7JW pdf icon PDF 1001 KB

Proposal

 

Erection of 3 dwellings with access and associated works (as amended by plans submitted 27/07/2020 and 21/08/2020 and 29/09/2020)

 

Recommendation

 

That, subject to conditions 1-16 and Informatives 1-14, permission be GRANTED.

Decision:

Planning permission REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

·         Overdevelopment

·         Lack of the consideration of the heritage importance of the site.

 

Exact wording to be agreed by Chairman and Ward Councillors.

 

 

Minutes:

Erection of 3 dwellings with access and associated works (as amended by plans submitted 27/07/2020 and 21/08/2020 and 29/09/2020)

 

The report was considered by the committee.

 

Public Speaking

 

In accordance with the Council’s public speaking scheme, the following made representations which were duly considered:

 

Serena O’Donell – Objector

Janet Long – In Support

Cllr Andy McLoad – Ward Councillor

Cllr Jerry Hyman – Farnham Councillor who had registered to speak.

 

The recommendation to grant planning permission subject to conditions 1-16 and Informatives 1-14, was overturned by a vote of 2 in favour, 12 against and one abstention.

 

An alternative recommendation to refuse the application was proposed by Cllr Michaela Martin, seconded by Cllr Carole Cockburn and was carried by a vote of 12 in favour, 2 against and no abstentions.

 

Members resolved to REFUSE the proposal for the following reasons:

 

1.    Reason

 

The proposed development is cramped and contrived and doesn’t follow the pattern of the area resulting in a backland formation and would materially detract from the character/appearance of the area in conflict with Policy TD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (2018) Part 1 and Saved Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (2002) and FNP 1 of the FarnhamNeidhbourhood Plan

 

2.    Reason

The proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the character of the Heritage Asset, Farnham Park, a Grade II Listed Park and Garden. The identified less than substantial harm wouldn’t outweigh the public benefit which would be the additional three dwellings and would be in conflict with Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990, Policy HA1 of the Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 and retained Policies HE3 and HE5 of the Local Plan 2002 and guidance contained in the NPPF (2019). and FNP 1 of the FarnhamNeidhbourhood Plan

 

 

139.

EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

To consider the following recommendation on the motion of the Chairman:

           

Recommendation

           

That, pursuant to Procedure Rule 20 and in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the item, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information (as defined by Section 100I of the Act) of the description specified at the meeting in the revised Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972

Minutes:

There were no items to discuss in exempt session so the Chairman close the meeting.