Agenda item

Proposal

Erection of 9 dwellings (3 affordable) with garaging, access, landscaping and associated works following demolition of existing dwelling (as amended by plans received 27/03/2019, 12/06/2019 and 14/06/2019).

Recommendations

Recommendation A:

That, subject to the applicant entering into an appropriate legal agreement within 6 months of the date of the committee resolution to grant planning permission to secure the provision of affordable housing and the maintenance of the SuDS, permission be GRANTED subject to conditions 1 – 20 and informatives  1 – 10.

Recommendation B:

That, in the event that the requirements of Recommendation A are not met, permission be REFUSED.

Proposal

Erection of 9 dwellings (3 affordable) with garaging, access, landscaping and associated works following demolition of existing dwelling (as amended by plans received 27/03/2019, 12/06/2019 and 14/06/2019).

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.

By way of update to the report, officers advised that they had taken the view that the provision of a LAP would not be required as part of this application as the site was immediately adjacent to a recreation ground with a play area.

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:

Ian Davis – Ewhurst Parish Council

Debate

The Committee considered the application and raised a number of concerns relating to the number of units on the site and the impact this had on separation distances, visual amenity and parking provision.

Cllr Henry felt that the proposed dwellings were too close to the eastern border of the site and was concerned by the potential for overlooking. Cllr Cockburn shared these concerns about the density of the layout, she felt that the requirement for obscure glazing in bedrooms was indicative of a cramped layout. Several other Councillors also felt that obscure glazing in the bedroom was not appropriate, although officers advised that these rooms did also have other, non-obscure gazed, windows.

Cllr Townsend also felt that the development was too dense, she queried whether the separation distances had been met in relation to the closest neighbouring property. Officers clarified that the separation distance requirement didn’t apply with side-on elevations and that the separations distances were met for all other properties.

Cllr Cosser highlighted the fact that if taken in isolation, the proposal failed to meet the parking guidelines and relied on surplus spaces in the wider development site in order to meet the requirement.

The Committee agreed two additional conditions to be added to the officer’s recommendation. These were to remove Permitted Development Rights to in relation to conversion of the garage to habitable accommodation and also in relation to the installation of roof lights.

Following the debate, the Committee moved to the revised recommendation and this was lost with 5 in favour, 17 against and 1 abstention.

It was proposed by Cllr Cockburn and seconded by Cllr Townsend that permission be refused and this was carried with 21 in favour and 2 against. The reasons for refusal are noted below.

Decision

RESOLVED that permission be REFUSED for the following reasons.

1.    The proposed development by virtue of the number of units proposed would result in a cramped and crowded layout that would be out of character with the surroundings causing consequent harm to the visual amenity of the area, contrary to Policies TD1 of the Local Plan Part 1 2018 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Plan 2002.

2.    In the absence of a completed legal agreement to secure affordable housing on the site, the proposed development would fail to provide on site affordable housing and, as such, the development would fail to provide a sustainable, inclusive and mixed community. The proposal would be contrary to Policy AHN1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 1) 2018, and paragraph 61 of the NPPF 2019.

3.    In the absence of a completed legal agreement to secure the maintenance of SUDs the proposed development would fail to ensure that the risk of flooding across the site is minimised and that the proposal would not result in an increase risk of flooding elsewhere, contrary to Policy CC4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 and paragraphs 163 and 165 of the NPPF 2019.