Agenda item

Proposal

Details pursuant to outline permission granted under WA/2016/2207 for 67 dwellings together with associated car parking, landscaping and open space pursuant to conditions 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 22, 26, 40 and 41 (as amended by plans and documents received 06/08/2018, 10/09/2018 and 30/10/2018). A statement of conformity to the original Environmental Statement has been provided with this application.

Recommendations

Proposed development

Details pursuant to outline permission granted under WA/2016/2207 for 67 dwellings together with associated car parking, landscaping and open space pursuant to conditions 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 22, 26, 40 and 41 (as amended by plans and documents received 06/08/2018, 10/09/2018 and 30/10/2018). A statement of conformity to the original Environmental Statement has been provided with this application.

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

The Committee was advised that since the publication of the agenda, officers had received further information from the Chairman, Mr Bamford, of Knowle Park Trust. This letter set out that it was to provide assurances in respect of the delivery of the public parkland.

Officers reminded the Committee that the application was originally brought before it on 12 November 2018. At that meeting it was agreed that the item be deferred to seek further information on the phasing elements of the outline permission and the delivery of the Knowle Park Trust units. Since that meeting, the applicants had submitted extra information to address these issues specifically the intended build programme, affordable home provision, parkland management, boundary treatment at the site entrance and information on A2Dominion.

Officers considered that the information provided in terms of how many units would be delivered as part of future Phases 2 and 3, and specifically how many of those would be affordable units, was sufficient in demonstrating that the overall affordable housing provision requirement of 35% as set out in S106 Agreement could be satisfactorily achieved across the site. Officers also confirmed that a reserved matters application for the Public Park Phase had been submitted to the Council for consideration and this was currently undergoing validation checks.

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:

Judith Ashton - Supporter

Debate

The Committee considered the application and thanked the applicants for the additional information that had been provided since the last meeting.

Councillor Liz Townsend raised and issue of concern with the footpath 393 which on the southern boundary and its relationship with the emergency access road, she asked for a condition to be placed on the notice that this be protected and maintained. Officers advised that there was a very slight overlap but the Rights of Way officer had not objected to the application. It was also an emergency access so would only be used on an exceptional basis. Officers did not feel that they could place an additional condition unless they could identify harm. It was a matter for Surrey County Council and the Landlord to discuss, however and additional informative would be added to the decision regarding this issue. Councillor Liz Townsend also asked a question regarding the 5metre buffer zone and officers confirmed that this would be maintained as indicated in the landscape scheme.

Councillor John Gray asked a question about the provision of quick charger points and it was agreed that condition 7 be amended to ensure that this was explicit to be provided. He asked a further question about the distance for some of the houses to reach the refuse collection points, particularly for people with physical disabilities. Officers outlined the plan showing the planned routes that showed only a short walking distance and it should not be an issue.

Councillor Mulliner spoke of his frustration that the affordable housing was only in one place and not spread around the development. It was noted though that this was current policy but it was felt that applicants should try and spread affordable housing around sites and not just all in one area.

A question was asked about the maintenance of the car barn and whether this was allocated parking with the residents being responsible for the maintenance. Officers advised that this would be allocated and it would be the responsibility of the management company for the upkeep.

Councillor Jerry Hyman asked a question in relation to recommendation B and whether or not this was the responsibility of the Committee. Officers advised that usually the discharge of conditions would be a decision taken by the Head of Planning but the application had been submitted with these attached. Consequently, Members agreed that recommendation B be amended that it be delegated to the Head of Planning, as it normally would be, and this was agreed unanimously.     

Following debate the Chairman moved to recommendation A as amended at the meeting and it was agreed unanimously. Following this recommendation B was considered as amended to delegate to the Head of Planning which was also agreed unanimously.

Decisions