Agenda item

Graham Parrott, Planning Policy Manager, outlined the report circulated with the agenda and highlighted the addendum to the pre-submission version of Local Plan Part 2.

It was explained that section 5.1 set out the main changes that were consulted on and section 6.1 outlined the key issues responded to.

Cllr Jerry Hyman had registered to speak and raised concern regarding the lack of a legal appropriate assessment and the update from Natural England on current bird numbers which had still to be submitted.  He felt we could not submit LPP2 without this appropriate assessment.  Zac Ellwood, Head of Planning and Economic Development assured members that an adequate appropriate assessment had been carried out.

Matt Ellis, Team Leader (Local Plans and Planning Policy) advised that Habitats regulations had been carried out on all pre submission sites and further were carried out on the modified sites.

Members discussed their reservations on the viability of the Royal School site in Haslemere and the impact on the AONB.  It was felt the site was at odds with the Haslemere Neighbourhood Plan and was not sustainable due to the lack of mains drainage. Concern was also raised regarding the distance from the town centre.

The Chairman asked what percentage of the Royal School site was currently developed and was advised this would be clarified prior to tomorrows meeting.

Graham Parrott advised that Natural England felt that SANG mitigation needed to be decided on a case-by-case basis as there was no ‘Thames basin’ solution.

Concern was also raised by members that the scrutiny of this document was taking place less than 24 hours prior to it being discussed at full Council. Apologies were given at this situation and it was explained that this was no ideal but in order to get the paper agreed before the end of the year this was necessary.

Members asked if Haslemere Town Council still supported the plan despite the change of site allocation?  It was highlighted that page 263 of the agenda advised that they did but that this would be clarified prior to full Council.

The Committee were reminded that the LPP2 document was about a number of sites and not just one and it was imperative we had a LPP2 to protect the area from bad developments.

Officers were asked to consider the lack of policies to protect equestrian land from development and to review this in future updates.

The Committee RESOLVED:

1. That the Head of Planning and Economic Development will provide an estimate of what proportion of the Royal School site is currently covered by buildings and hard standing in time for Executive on the 14th December 2021?

3. That the Head of Planning and Economic Development will confirm in time for Executive on the 14th December 2021, whether, in light of Mr Baudry's question, Haslemere Town Council are content with the characterisation of their views in the report.

4. To recommend that at a later date the Executive should consider developing an equestrian policy to protect the unique quality of Waverley's rural settlements

5. To recommend that the Executive and Council have due regard to the following questions when debating the recommendations in section 2 of the report:

a) Whether an appropriate assessment is required in order to comply with habitats regulations?

b) Whether the likelihood that future development at Royal School will exceed the footprint of existing buildings and hard surfaces at the site would threaten the setting of the neighbouring countryside?

c) Whether the Red Court site being nearer the settlement boundary and being more walkable from Haslemere makes it a more appropriate site than the Royal School? Do these factors impinge on Waverley's commitment to sustainability?

d) Whether the Executive and the Full Council can have confidence that the Royal School (including its playing fields) will be able to relocate to the Farnham Road and make the site available within the plan period?

e) Whether the cost of providing sewage infrastructure at the Royal School raises viability concerns which might impact on its deliverability?

f) Whether the Council has a duty to co-operate with East Hampshire District and Grayshott Parish Councils regarding the Royal School site?

g) Whether either, both or neither the Royal School and Red Court sites should be treated as brownfield and/or previously developed sites?

h) Whether the requirement identified by Acorn Consultants to provide a SANG to mitigate the impact of development at the Royal School adversely impacts the deliverability of that site?

i) Whether screening is an adequate response to the potential loss of green space on the Royal School site?

j) Whether allocating the Royal School sets an unwelcome precedent about building in AONB?

k) Whether a given course of action will delay adoption of LPP2 as a whole and, therefore, reduce the Council's control over development within the Borough?