Agenda item

Proposal

Amendment to Condition 5 of planning permission ref. no. WA/2018/0544 restricting works on main East Street redevelopment permission (WA/2012/0912 and WA/2016/0268) from commencing until dual lane bridge is constructed to allow the demoliton of Brightwell Cottage in advance of the bridge construction

Recommendation

That the non-material amendment application be approved subject to amended Condition 5 as follows:

Proposal

Amendment to Condition 5 of Planning Permission ref. no. WA/2018/0544 restricting works on main East Street redevelopment permission (WA/2012/0912 and WA/2016/0268) from commencing until dual lane bridge is constructed to allow the demolition of Brightwell Cottage in advance of the bridge construction.

With reference to the report circulated with the agenda, Officers explained that this application was for a Non Material Amendment (NMA) to the planning permission (WA/2018/0544) for the dual lane construction bridge associated with the East Street redevelopment scheme, approved by the Committee on 9 July 2018. The amendment to Condition 5 would bring the planning permission into line with the agreed phasing plan for the main redevelopment scheme, and specifically enable Brightwell Cottage to be demolished prior to the completion of the construction bridge.

Officers confirmed that the latest bat survey for Brightwell Cottage, undertaken 20  September 2018, had not identified any maternity roosts, only day roosts; a Natural England licence had been issued on this basis. If maternity roosts were subsequently found during the pre-demolition and demolition processes, work would cease and Natural England would be contacted. The pole-mounted bat boxes provided would be acceptable mitigation for the species of bat previously evidenced on the site.

In response to a query raised earlier in the day by Cllr Hyman, Officers presented a revised recommendation, requiring the applicants to demonstrate that they had an interest in the land subject of the NMA application before the NMA application would be approved.

Debate

Cllr James had no objection to the NMA, but asked that it be made clear in the conditions that the demolition material from Brightwell Cottage must be stockpiled on the site until it could be removed via the construction bridge.

In response to Members’ question on process, Officers confirmed that the NMA application for the revised phasing plans had been agreed by the Joint Planning Committee on 30 July 2018, and they were satisfied that the applicant had the necessary interest for that application to be approved. That NMA had been in relation to the permission for the main redevelopment scheme, whereas the NMA now being considered by the Committee was in relation to the bridge planning permission.

Cllr Hyman raised a number of points in relation to EIA and the impacts of the main redevelopment scheme. He proposed that the decision on this NMA be deferred for further information. There was no seconder to the proposal.

Officers advised the Committee that the NMA application was in relation to the planning permission for the dual lane bridge, which was not an EIA application. The NMA was a minor amendment and Officers were satisfied that there was no need for an EIA in the wider context of the development. Cllr Hyman’s queries related to the main redevelopment scheme permission which had been subject to an EIA which was found to be acceptable. The Council was satisfied that the decisions were lawful then, and now.

The Committee noted that the wording of the NMA before them had been amended with the agreement of the applicant, as the provision of welfare facilities and demolition of the tennis pavilion had already been dealt with under the previous permission so no longer needed to be included. Officers confirmed that it was acceptable to change the wording of the application with the agreement of the applicant.

Officers confirmed that the timing for the erection of the pole-mounted bat boxes was contained within the original planning permission.

Cllr Cockburn expressed her frustration at what she felt were tactics to impede progress on the redevelopment. It was not unusual to have requests for minor changes to redevelopment schemes once work started on site, and it was not in anyone’s interests to delay work moving forward.

The Chairman moved to the revised recommendations:

Decision

Revised Recommendation A:

The Committee voted 17 in favour, and 1 against, and

RESOLVED that, subject to the applicants demonstrating within 3 months from 03.10.2018, that they do have an interest in the land, the Non Material Amendment application to amend Condition 5 of Planning Permission WA/2018/0544, as shown below in bold, be APPROVED.

Recommendation B:

The Committee voted unanimously in favour, and

RESOLVED that, in the event that the applicants do not demonstrate within 3 months from 03.10.2018 that they have an interest in the land, approval of the Non-Material Amendment application be refused for the following reason:

   1)       The applicants have not demonstrated that they have an interest in the land, as required by Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act.

Amended Condition 5 of WA/2018/0544

The proposed road and vehicular access to the A31 Bypass and South St, including temporary vehicular bridge over Borelli Walk and the River Wey, shall be designed and constructed prior to the demolition works approved by WA/2012/0912 and WA/2016/0268, with the exception of Brightwell Cottage. No demolition or other works, including the removal of demolition material, that fall within these planning consents that constitute development (other than the demolition of Brightwell Cottage), shall begin before the South St and A31 accesses, the bridge, access road and site compound have been completed in accordance with the application drawings and requirements of the County Highway Authority. Once constructed, the accesses and bridge shall be retained free of any obstruction until their removal.