To answer the following question from Mr Jerry Hyman of Farnham, received in accordance with Procedure Rule 10:-
“Mr Mayor,
In 2013 redacted notes of the Council's Brightwell Steering Group meetings were obtained under the FoI Act, which confirmed that numerous changes to the design and content of the East Street scheme are to be made, and so for more than 2 years Farnham has been patiently awaiting further news; in particular, the Council had confirmed that planning applications will be necessary for both :
(i) the changes to design and use of block D20, due to the removal of the Brightwell Gostrey Centre from the scheme, and
(ii) the changes to the arrangements for the dedicated temporary Construction Access, to use a Bailey Bridge and Borelli Walk.
In respect of the latter, the intended change to use a Bailey Bridge design launched from the south riverbank, requiring that Borelli Walk be used as a Site Compound and Haul Route from South Street, was also confirmed by Council documents in July, and as it involves significant impacts outside of the area, scope and parameters of the existing EIA for the project, the law requires prior environmental assessment. Indeed the Planning Department's own advice from 2013/14 (again obtained under FoI) stated that in respect of the revised construction access proposals, "a new planning application would need to be submitted as it would be notably different to the extant scheme" and that "As per the previous scheme, all necessary updates to the Environmental Statement would need to be carried out and submitted up front with a new application".
The minor works conducted by Crest-Sainsbury's in August were intended to serve as 'Material Starts' for the revised Brightwells and Construction Access developments, but as the necessary planning applications and prior assessment of likely environmental impacts are still awaited, it is quite obvious that the required consents for those works cannot exist and that the assumed past permissions cannot lawfully apply.
In view of those simple facts, can Members and the public be assured that the Council will not allow any further demolition works or tree felling for the East Street project to be carried out until planning permissions for all the known changes to scheme, including those outlined above, have been obtained?
[NB. Questions from members of the public express personal views of the questioners and Waverley does not endorse any statements in any way and they do not reflect the views of Waverley Borough Council].
Minutes:
The following question was received from Mr Hyman of Farnham in accordance with Procedure Rule 10:
“Mr Mayor,
In 2013 redacted notes of the Council's Brightwell Steering Group meetings were obtained under the FoI Act, which confirmed that numerous changes to the design and content of the East Street scheme are to be made, and so for more than 2 years Farnham has been patiently awaiting further news; in particular, the Council had confirmed that planning applications will be necessary for both :
(i) the changes to design and use of block D20, due to the removal of the Brightwell Gostrey Centre from the scheme, and
(ii) the changes to the arrangements for the dedicated temporary Construction Access, to use a Bailey Bridge and Borelli Walk.
In respect of the latter, the intended change to use a Bailey Bridge design launched from the south riverbank, requiring that Borelli Walk be used as a Site Compound and Haul Route from South Street, was also confirmed by Council documents in July, and as it involves significant impacts outside of the area, scope and parameters of the existing EIA for the project, the law requires prior environmental assessment. Indeed the Planning Department's own advice from 2013/14 (again obtained under FoI) stated that in respect of the revised construction access proposals, "a new planning application would need to be submitted as it would be notably different to the extant scheme" and that "As per the previous scheme, all necessary updates to the Environmental Statement would need to be carried out and submitted up front with a new application".
The minor works conducted by Crest-Sainsbury's in August were intended to serve as 'Material Starts' for the revised Brightwells and Construction Access developments, but as the necessary planning applications and prior assessment of likely environmental impacts are still awaited, it is quite obvious that the required consents for those works cannot exist and that the assumed past permissions cannot lawfully apply.
In view of those simple facts, can Members and the public be assured that the Council will not allow any further demolition works or tree felling for the East Street project to be carried out until planning permissions for all the known changes to scheme, including those outlined above, have been obtained?”
The Portfolio Holder for Brightwells, Cllr Julia Potts, replied as follows:-
“Thank you Mr Hyman for your question. I think you may be under the impression that further planning applications are required before the scheme can be implemented. This is not however the case because the planning consents for both the main Brightwells scheme and the temporary bridge from the site to the A31 have been lawfully implemented. A number of conditions are in place which control the development, and that includes a requirement that before works take place to further implement the main scheme, the temporary bridge is constructed.
However, if Crest Nicholson wish to amend the consented scheme then it will be for them to submit the necessary planning application to Waverley which will then be assessed in the normal way against the relevant planning considerations.”