Agenda item

Proposal

Alteration, extension, landscaping and improvement to existing access from Sturt Road to land to the rear of Sturt Farm, and the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG).

Recommendations

Proposed development

Alteration, extension, landscaping and improvement to existing access from Sturt Road to land to the rear of Sturt Farm, and the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG)

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 the proposed development including site plans and the layout. Officers outlined the determining issues and those matters of a more subjective nature.

Officers advised that since the publication of the agenda, there had been six additional letters of representation to the proposal. One representation raised objection to the proposal, however, the letter raised no new comments over those set out in the Agenda Report. Three letters had been received (from two addresses) withdrawing their previous objections to the application. Two letters of representation had been received from the Campaign to Protect Rural England.  The first letter requested that the Joint Planning Committee was deferred for at least a month to allow the consideration of additional information.  They also requested that the Officer Recommendation should be reconsidered in light of any additional comments. 

Officers advised that the additional information did not change the proposal, but, instead, gave further clarifying information on what the developer considered to be the public benefits of the proposal.  An assessment of the information was set out in the “Public Benefits” section of the Agenda Report. Officers were satisfied that no additional consultation needed to take place, however, in the interests of good will, a 7 day consultation letter was sent out.  In addition to this, legal advice had been sought to ensure that they could proceed.

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:

Nigel Whitehead - Applicant/Agent

Discussion

The Committee considered the report and the new information reported verbally from Surrey Highways. They also considered what the impact of the access would be on the neighbouring properties. Officers advised that  the proposed extension and alterations to the existing access track and the change of use to provide SANG would have a limited impact on the surrounding character of the area. Therefore, the proposal would have limited prominence in the broader landscape and would not cause material harm to the Countryside and would conserve the landscape character and natural beauty of the AONB and AGLV. It was considered that the proposal would be an improvement over the consented access in terms of its impact on landscape character.

Members noted that the consented scheme would result in the delivery of a substantial level of both market and affordable housing approved at outline stage. However, the alternative access would allow for the provision of 11 additional residential units at Sturt Farm, 4 of which would be on site affordable homes over what could be delivered with the extant access. This would contribute significantly towards housing in the Borough and the proposal would allow for the greater provision of onsite affordable housing.

Following discussion, the Committee moved to the first recommendation which 15 voted in favour, 12 against and with 3 abstentions. Recommendation B was passed unanimously.

Decisions

Decision A: RESOLVED that permission be GRANTED, subject to a legal agreement to secure the SANG requirements and the implementation of the access proposed as part of the consent instead of the previous consented access being completed, and subject to conditions 1-10 and informatives 1-2 set out on pages of the Agenda Report; and

Decision B: In the event a Section 106 Agreement is not completed as noted above within 6 months of the resolution to grant planning permission, permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.    The proposal, in the absence of a completed legal agreement and as a result of providing a second access to the proposed residential dwellings at Sturt Farm (consented access under WA/2014/1054) would in combination, result in an unacceptable urbanising impact which would harm the landscape character of the area.  The proposal would cause material harm to the intrinsic character, beauty and openness of the Countryside beyond the Green Belt and the AGLV, contrary to Policies D1, D4, C2 and C3 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002, paragraphs 17 and 109 of the NPPF 2012, Policies RE1 and RE3 of the Pre-Submission Local Plan Part 1: Strategic Policies and Sites and Policies 2017.

2.    The proposed access as a result of the increased width and formalisation of the access road, together with the provision of a second access to the proposed residential dwellings at Sturt Farm (consented under WA/2014/1054) would dilute the setting of the historic farm complex, failing to preserve the setting of the Listed Buildings and Building of Local Merit and resulting in less than substantial harm to the designated and non-designated Heritage Assets.  In the absence of a completed legal agreement to prevent the consented access (access approved under WA/2014/1054) also being delivered, the public benefits would not outweigh the less than substantial harm.  The proposal would therefore conflict with Policies HE2 and HE3 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan, paragraphs 134 and 135 of the NPPF 2012, Policy HA1 of the Pre-Submission Local Plan Part 1: Strategic Policies and Sites and Policies 2017.

3.    In the absence of a completed legal agreement, the proposed public open space could not be secured as SANG (Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace).  As such, there would be benefit to outweigh the loss of the agricultural land.  The proposal would therefore conflict with Policy RD9 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and paragraph 112 of the NPPF 2012.