Agenda item

Proposal

Outline application for proposed development of up to 31 dwellings with access to be determined (alternative proposal Option 2).

Recommendation

That, subject to completion of a S106 legal agreement to secure 29.5% affordable housing, infrastructure contributions towards off-site early years and primary education, environmental improvements, recreational facilities, on-site public footpath works and the setting up of a Management Company for open space and SuDS, and subject to conditions, permission be GRANTED.

Proposed development

Outline application for proposed development of up to 31 dwellings with access to be determined at Land at Backward Point, Cranleigh Road, Ewhurst GU6 7RJ

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

Officers drew attention to the Update Sheet and advised Members that there had been a consultee response from the Surrey Hills Area Of Natural Beauty Officer. An additional condition, 21, had also been recommended by Officers in relation to the electricity pole at the site entrance to Cranleigh Road.

Public Speaking

In accordance with the Council’s arrangements for public participation at meetings, the following public speakers then made representations in respect of the application, which were duly considered:

John Robbins – Objector

Councillor Mike Turner – Ewhurst Parish Council

Colin Viret.- Applicant

Discussion

The Committee discussed the application which sought outline permission for the development proposal with all matters reserved except access. Members were reminded that all other matters were to be reserved for future consideration and that this type of planning application sought a determination as to the acceptability of the principle of the proposed development.

Members expressed regret that the outline would result in the loss of a greenfield site whilst acknowledging the need for housing to be built. However, concerns were raised about the density of housing outlined and its scale which was considered to not be in keeping with the village of Ewhurst. It was suggested that the density was double that of neighbouring properties and that that would result in an acceptable level of urbanisation.

Viability and access to the site was considered very poor and Members were unconvinced that HGVs would be able to safely navigate the access road, especially when taking pedestrians into consideration.

Officers responded that the Surrey County Highways Authority had looked at the access plans and were happy that it would be unlikely that two HGVs would try to enter the site at the same time.

Members were reminded that Paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework required a presumption in favour of sustainable development and that Officers had been satisfied that the proposed site was a suitable location in terms of services and facilities. There had been no significant harm identified in terms of bio-diversity. The development would be screened from the highway and that there was no wider landscape harm.

In summing up, Officers explained that they believed there was no significant or demonstrable harm of a scale high enough to outweigh the provision of housing.

With no further comments from Members, the Chairman moved the revised recommendation contained within the Update Sheet.

The recommendation to grant outline planning permission was rejected with 2 Members voting in support and 16 voting against. There were no abstentions.

Decision

RESOLVED to REFUSE permission for the reasons 1 to 4 as set out below:

1. Reason

The proposal, by virtue of the number of dwellings, density, scale, urbanising impact and harm to the character and appearance of the open field and would therefore fail to preserve the intrinsic beauty and character of the Countryside, contrary to Policies C2, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and Paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2002. Within these areas the countryside is to be protected for its own sake and development in open countryside outside existing rural settlements is strictly controlled. The proposed development does not comply with the requirements of those policies.

2. Reason

The proposed access road by virtue of its relationship with the existing public footpath number 437 would cause a conflict between the users of the footpath and the access road and it would also result in the loss of the soft landscape appearance to the site boundary. The proposal would therefore harm the visual amenities of the area and it would also fail to improve conditions for pedestrians using the footpath, contrary to Local Plan Policies D1, D4 and M4 of the Waverley Borough Council Local Plan 2002 and Paragraph 17 of the NPPF.

3. Reason

In the absence of a signed legal agreement, the proposal would fail to provide affordable housing within the meaning of the NPPF, appropriate to meet Waverley Borough Council’s housing need. The proposal is therefore contrary to Paragraph 50 of the NPPF as the development does not provide a mix of housing based on current and future demographic trends, market trends and the needs of different groups in the community.

4. Reason

The Applicant has failed to enter into an appropriate legal agreement in respect of required and necessary infrastructure contributions to seek to mitigate the effects of the proposal upon infrastructure. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies D13 and D14 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and the Waverley Borough Council Infrastructure Contribution SPD (April 2008) and paragraph 203 of the NPPF 2012.