Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 19 March 2019 as published.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 March 2019 be approved and signed as a true and correct record.

No apologies for absence were received.

(i)    To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary and other interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.

(ii)   In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, any Member who is a Council- appointed Director of a Thameswey Group company will declare a non-pecuniary interest in any item involving that Thameswey Group company. The interest will not prevent the Member from participating in the consideration of that item.

(iii)   In accordance with the Officer Procedure Rules, any Officer who is a Council- appointed Director of a Thameswey Group company will declare an interest in any item involving that Thameswey Group company. The interest will not prevent the Officer from advising the Committee on that item.

In accordance with the Officer Procedure Rules, Peter Bryant, Head of Democratic and Legal Services, declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item No. 6a 2018/0337  – Sheerwater Estate, Albert Drive, Sheerwater and 6b 2018/0374  –  Sheerwater Estate, Albert Drive, Sheerwater and Item No. 6g 2018/1320 – 121 Chertsey Road, Woking arising from his position as a Council appointed Director of Thameswey Development Limited and the Thameswey Group of Companies.  The interest was as such that it would not prevent the Officer from advising on that item.

In accordance with the Officer Procedure Rules, Douglas Spinks, Deputy Chief Executive, declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item No 6a  2018/0337  -  Sheerwater Estates, Albert Drive, Sheerwater and 6b 2018/0374  -  Sheerwater Estate, Albert Drive, Sheerwater and  Item No. 6g – 121 Chertsey Road, Woking arising from his position as a Council appointed Director of the Thameswey Group of Companies.  The interest was as such that it would not prevent the Officer from advising on that item.

To consider any business that the Chairman rules may be dealt with under Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no items of Urgent Business.

Resolved

That the report be noted.

The Committee determined the following applications subject to the conditions, informatives, reasons for refusal or authorisation of enforcement action which appear in the published report to the Committee or as detailed in these minutes.

The committee considered a full hybrid planning application for the demolition of 573 residential units and existing non-residential buildings and redevelopment of the site to be implemented in phases which will provide a mixed-use development comprising of 869 residents units, 134 specialist residential units, community centre, nursery/children's centre, health centre, additional classrooms, of retail (flexible use) management office, and a dentist.  A new energy centre, formation of a new car park for Broadmere Primary school, formation of an extended car park for Bishop David Brown School and the Leisure Centre, including a bus/coach drop off area, formation of a new community car park to serve community hub, hard and soft landscaping and open space with a kiosk, a multi-use games area and a skate park.  The reconfigured and new vehicular and pedestrian access and works to the public highway and associated works,  including full planning application for detailed phases comprising of  the demolition of 412 residential units, existing non-residential buildings, including the construction of 695 residential units comprising of 7 studios, 68 one-bedroom specialist accommodation, 160 one-bed units, 227 two-bed units, 160 three-bed units, 71 four-bed units, and 2 five-bed units including a Community Centre, retail, nursery/children’s centre health centre, an energy centre, formation of an extended car park for Bishop David Brown School and the Leisure Centre, including a bus/coach drop of area. Formation of a new community car park to serve community hub, hard and soft landscaping and open space with a kiosk, a multi-use games area and a skate park reconfigured and a new vehicular and pedestrian access including works to the public highway and associated works.

[Note 1: The Planning Officer advised Members on a written update, please see attached for various amendments.]

[Note 2: The Planning Officer advised of an additional letter of objection received raising concerns which were mainly reiterated in the comments already summarised within the representations section of the report].

[Note 3:  In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee Mr Michael Adams attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and Mr Simon Owen spoke in support].

At the request of the Chairman the Planning Officer addressed concerns raised by the objector on the loss of open space. Comparisons were made to the previously approved application against the proposal before the committee.  It had been highlighted that the proposed scheme would provide an increased open space compared to the previous approved scheme.

Councillor Aziz, Ward Councillor, queried on the drainage, risk of flooding and objections raised within the environmental report.

The Drainage Officer, Katherine Walters enlightened members on the application which had been reviewed for both water surface and overland flow.  The revised plan had shown an improved scheme for the surface water which reduced flooding risk to the site and surrounding areas.  

In regards to the environmental report, it had been underlined that the canal buffer zone in the low rise area had been reduced marginally which raised objections from the Environmental Agency.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6a

The Committee considered an application which sought planning permission for a Section 73 application to remove conditions 26, to vary Condition 4 (approved plans insofar as they relate to the Leisure Centre and sports pitches), Condition 23 (phase 1b playing fields timeline), to submit details to satisfy Condition 21 (on/off-site drainage works), Condition 27 (drainage details for phase 1a(i)), Condition 28 (drainage details for phase 1a(ii)), Condition 29 (drainage details for phase 1a(iii)), Condition 30 (drainage details for phase 1b), Condition 52 (external materials for Leisure Centre), Condition 53 (details of finished floor levels for Leisure Centre), Condition 54 (sustainability - substitution of combined heat and power plant with a ground source heat pump) and amendments to wording of Condition 36 (phase 1c details of front boundary enclosures), Condition 38 (phase 1c biodiversity enhancement measures), Condition 43 (phase 1c external materials), Condition 45 (phase 1c details of bin storage areas), Condition 46 (phase 1c details of photovoltaic panels), Condition 47 (phase 1c sustainability measures), Condition 49 (protection of residential properties from noise), Condition 51 (phase 1c details of play area/trim trail delivery) to alter the timing for the submission of details for approval, of planning permission PLAN/2015/1260 for the redevelopment of the Sheerwater Estate.

[Note 1:  The Planning officer update Committee Members on the following written updates:

·         The Drainage Engineer recommend approval of the application subject to recommendations;

·         Council’s Executive meeting held on 28 March resolved recommendations  to obligations as outlined in the report;

·         Confirmation to changes of drainage conditions to reflect the updated drainage conditions].

[Note 2: In accordance with Officers Procedure Rules, Peter Bryant, Head of Democratic and Legal Services, declared a non- pecuniary interest in Woking Football Club in respect of discussions arising from (i) being a Member of the Cards Trust, the supporters’ club for Woking Football Club and (ii) providing occasional assistance to Woking Football Club.  The interest was such that speaking was permissible].

[Note 3:  In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, Councillor I Eastwood declared a non-pecuniary interest in Woking Football Club in respect of discussions arising from his position as a minor Shareholder and Member of the Cards Trust of Woking Football Club.  The interest was such that speaking and voting was permissible].

Councillor Aziz, Ward Councillor spoke in support of the application and queried whether an additional condition would be added in regards to the facilities being delivered prior the start of the first phase of the scheme.  It had been highlighted that within conditions of the report, leisure facilities would be delivered once the 375 dwelling had been erected. 

A query was raised on the Sheerwater Football Club.  The football club was said to be currently temporarily using Woking Football Club grounds.  It was thought that a delay in constructing the football pitch would result in the Club’s league status being affected.  It had been underlined in condition 16 that condition 62 also controlled the timing of the delivery of the sports pitches for phases  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6b

The Committee considered  an application for the demolition of No.78 Chertsey Road and the erection of 6 two storey dwellings (4 three bedroom and 2 four bedroom) on land to the rear of No's 76-82 Chertsey Road including associated parking, access, landscaping and the erection of a detached garage to the rear of No.76 Chertsey Road.

[Note 1: In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Mr Dan Goodger attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and Mr Tom Rumble spoke in support].

At the request of the Chairman the Planning Officer responded to concerns raised by the objector which included, water surface drainage and the removal of trees. It had been noted that the trees had been removed prior submission of the planning application.  The trees were not subjected to a Tree Protection Order (TPO) and therefore consent had not been required.  The Drainage Engineer  had been consulted and  raised no objections  subject to a condition securing details of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme.

A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal concluded that there had been low potential for the presence of bats and other species on the site assessed.  Several recommendations and precautions  were made with regards to the clearance of the site in the report.

An informative had been highlighted with regards to noise pollution.  The applicant had been advised of restricted working hours in order to comply with the Control of Pollution Act 1974.

Councillor Boote, Ward Councillor spoke in objection to the application and felt the proposal was an overdevelopment which would be present cramped and contrived.  It was thought the proposal would be in breach of Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy.  Additional concerns raised included the overlooking and privacy to neighbouring back properties, including access and parking issues.

Discussions ensued on the risk of highway safety and access issues on traffic.  The Planning Officer acknowledged the busy road and density of  parking.  The development proposed 14 car parking spaces which complied with Council’s Parking Standards requirements.  Surrey County Highways reviewed the highways proposal and raised no safety concerns subject to conditions outlined

Some Members spoke in support of the application and thought the proposed development was acceptable and complied with the Council’s Outlook, Amenity and Privacy SPD and considered not to have an overbearing impact to neighboring properties.

In accordance with Standing Order.22.2, the votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows:

In favour                                  Cllrs Eastwood, Martin, Morales and Whitehand

                                                TOTAL: 4

Against:                                   Cllrs, Aziz and Boote

                                                TOTAL: 2

Present and not voting:           Cllrs Ashall, Cundy (Chairman) and Chrystie.

                                                TOTAL: 3

The application was there approved.

          RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to recommended conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement. 

The Committee considered an application for the construction of a new indoor swimming pool with gymnasium with associated access footpath linked to Hawkswell Walk, parking, fencing and landscaping.

[Note 1:  In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Ms Claire Bridges attended the meeting and spoke in objection and Mr Roger Langham spoke in support].

[Note 2: The Planning Officer advised Members of an update on an amendment to  Condition 2 as detail below:

Remove from ‘Proposed Drawings’:

C4545 C05 (Plan and elevations), dated July 2018

Insert under ‘Proposed Drawings’:

C4545 C10 (Plan & elevations without trees), dated August 2018].

[Note: 3  The Planning Officer advised the Committee that an additional nine letters of objections and two in support had been received mainly reiterated the comments already summarised in the report].

The Chairman requested for the Planning Officer to address concerns raised by the objector which included commercial use of the facilities, opening hours and parking issues.  The Planning Officer advised the Committee that the planning application would need to be considered on its own merits.  Proposed operating hours of use to non-school users outside the school term times and to non-school users during the school term times were outlined in the report.

Councillor Eastwood, Ward Councillor acknowledged there had been a need for swimming facilities in the Goldsworth Park area, however, concerns on parking arrangements, and the operating times of the facility had been highlighted.

Councillor Eastwood, Ward Councillor, spoke in support of the application and welcomed the proposal.  It was thought the school and local schools within the area would benefit from the swimming facilities.  He further added that the commercial use had been necessary in order for the school to run the facility effectively.

It was highlighted that public entrance through the school would be restricted.

Councillor Eastwood suggested for the amendment to the opening and closing hours of the facility in order to relieve concerns raised by residents regarding noise impact along the footpath.

Some Councillors thought the proposed hours of use would benefit the working public accessing the facilities. 

Discussions ensued on the noise impact to the residents along Hawkswell Walk.  Some Members argued that pedestrian access would be  transient along a public footpath. Relevant signage would be erected reminding pedestrians to respect residents privacy.

Whilst Members acknowledged the importance of the swimming pool for school children only, some Members were not in agreement to commercial use of the facilities.  It was felt that the commercial use would  benefit the school in maintaining the high running costs of the facilities, however not all Committee Members were convinced.

Councillor Morales suggested a 1 year condition to the proposed  opening and closing times in order to assess the impact of noise to neighbours.

Councillor Martin requested clarification on the Environmental Health consultation.  The Planning Officer highlighted that conditions 12, 13, 14, and 15 within the recommended conditions addressed the matter.

Councillor Aziz reminded the Committee to be mindful when considering the application before them.  If  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6d

The Committee considered an application for the Re-location of an existing steel container.

[Note 1:  The Committee were advised of an update to Condition 4 as detailed below:

“Within 3 months of the relocation of the steel container to the position hereby approved its exterior shall be painted/finished in a dark green colour unless otherwise first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and to comply with Policies CS20, CS21 and CS24 of the Woking Core Strategy 2012 and the NPPF].

          RESOLVED

          That planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

The Committee considered and application for the erection of two 1 bedroom flats and the installation of additional boilers to all flats within the existing development.

[NOTE 1:  The Planning Officer updated the Committee on update to Condition 6 as follows:

“The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the following facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved plans for:”

The condition should read as follows:

“The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the following facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved plans for:

(a)  The secure parking of bicycles within the development site, and thereafter the said approved facilities shall be provided, retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason:  The above condition is required in recognition of Section 9 “Promoting Sustainable Transport" in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.]

          RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to conditions and legal agreement.

The Committee considered an application for the creation of an additional storey across building to provide 8  studio apartments and the reconfiguration of car parking and including new landscaping.

[Note 1: The Planning Officer advised of an additional letter of objection received raising concerns which were reiterated in the comments already summarised within the representations sections of the report].

Councillor Aziz, Ward Councillor raised concerns on overlooking and loss of daylight to neighbouring properties.

It was thought that due to the distance from with the application site it was considered the proposed building would not have an overbearing, overlooking or loss of daylight or privacy impact to No. 2, 4 and 6 Portugal Road.

A query on parking and change of use of the building had been raised and the Planning Officer clarified that 17 car parking spaces would be provided and would comply with the car parking standards within the SPD document.

The proposal was thought to deliver 8 studio flats ranging from size 37 square metres to 44.5 square metres which would be consistent with the recommended minimum standards set out in the National Technical Housing Standards.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to recommended conditions.

The Planning Committee considered two retrospective planning application Nos. 2018/1019 and 2018/1026  for a two storey side and rear addition and two storey rear extension following demolition of the existing rear conservatory with car parking space at rear.

[Note 1: The Planning Officer updated Members on an update to PLAN/2018/1019 & PLAN/2018/1026 153 and 155 Hawthorn Road

1. All developments shall be constructed in accordance with the submitted and approved SuDS Drainage Report (dated March 2019), SW Drainage System Drawing No. N1-10-01 C (dated 01/03/19) and Drainage Construction Details Drawing No. N1-10-02 C (dated 06/03/19).

Reason:

To ensure the surface water drainage is adequately addressed for the development in accordance with policy CS9 of the Woking Core Strategy 2012 and the policies in the NPPF.

2. A verification report, (appended with substantiating evidence demonstrating the approved construction details and specifications have been implemented in accordance with the surface water drainage scheme), has been submitted to and approved (in writing) by the Local Planning Authority within 3 months of completion. The verification report shall include photographs of excavations and soil profiles/horizons, any installation of any surface water structure and Control mechanism.

Reason:

To ensure that the development achieves a high standard of sustainability and to comply with Policies CS9 and CS16 of the Woking Core Strategy 2012 and the policies in the NPPF].

[Note 2: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that since the publication of the agenda an update drainage report was submitted to the local planning authority,  the Drainage Officer raised no concerns following the 2 conditions listed below if the application would be approved:

·         The scheme should be carried in accordance with the details submitted; and

·         A verification report detailing of all requested information should be submitted with 3 months of the completion of the scheme.

Councillor Ashall, Ward Councillor, reminded the Committee that  the application had been called in as the application fell to be resolved by exercise of planning judgement.  

It had been highlighted that both applications 2018/1019 and 2018/1026  were both re-submissions of recently refused schemes from 2017.

Some Members were confused as to why the application before the Committee was recommended  for refusal when a similar application had been approved previously.  The floor plan was thought to be exactly the same floor plan with no changes.  A minimal of 5% increase was said to be added for the side extension.

The Planning Officer clarified that the floor plans were not the same comparing the proposed scheme to the previous scheme.  It was highlighted that an increased scale of development was proposed to a previously refused scheme.

The Committee took a short recess in order to change the recording disk of the meeting.

Councillor Whitehand opposed to approval the scheme which was said to have a larger increase to the density when the previously smaller density was refused.

Some Councillors apposed approval addressed all issues raised in the previously refused scheme and thought the proposal before the Committee was of a better quality than the previous  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6h

The Committee considered an application for a proposed erection of a two storey front and two storey side extension with porch addition.

A vote was taken separately on application 2018/1026 – 155 Hawthorn Road, Woking.

The application was discussed collectively with application 2018/1019 – 153 Hawthorn Road, Woking.

The votes for and against the application were recorded as follows:

In favour:                                 Cllrs Aziz, Boote, Chrystie Eastwood and Morales

TOTAL: 5

Against:                                   Cllrs Whitehand

TOTAL: 1

Present but not voting:           Cllrs Ashall, Cundy (The Chairman), and Martin

TOTAL: 3

The application was therefore approved

RESOLVED 

That the planning application be granted subject to conditions and a  Section 106 Agreement.

The Committee considered an application for the retention of a two storey side extension to 4 Glebe Gardens.

The application was withdrawn from the Planning Committee meeting.

The Chairman together with Committee Members expressed their gratitude towards Councillor Eastwood for his valuable contributions to the Planning Committee over the years.  Members wished him well in his retirement.

The Chairman took the opportunity to thank all Committee Members for contributions during  the municipal year.