Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 12 November 2019 as published.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 November 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.

No declarations of interest were received.

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.

The Committee received a report on the planning appeals lodged and the appeal decisions. In doing so, the Committee was advised that Planning Application 2019/0380 (Grass Verge at Egley Road, Hook Heath, Woking) had been refused by the Committee, not under delegated powers.

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 an application for the erection of 2 x two-bedroom single storey dwellings with associated hard and soft landscaping following the demolition of the existing garage block.

Councillor Hussain considered that the proposed development would have a detrimental effect of the character of the surrounding area, and an adverse impact on bats.

Councillor Morales considered that the proposal was a significant improvement on what had been submitted previously. Councillor Morales acknowledged that the land had been badly kept and that there was a housing shortage in Woking.

Councillor Hussain proposed and it was duly seconded that the application be refused on the grounds that it (i) was contrary to Policies CS7, CS21 and CS24 and (ii) would have an adverse impact on bats.

In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion above. The votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows:-

In favour:                                 Cllrs S Ashall, T Aziz, A Boote, S Hussain and L S Lyons.

                                                TOTAL: 5

Against:                                   Cllrs G W Elson and L M N Morales.

                                                TOTAL: 2

Present but not voting:            Cllrs G G Chrystie (Chairman) and N Martin.

                                                TOTAL: 2

The application was therefore refused.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused on the grounds that it (i) was contrary to Policies CS7, CS21 and CS24 and (ii) would have an adverse impact on bats.

The Committee considered an application for the proposed variation to the internal layout at basement and ground floor levels and internal changes at first, second and third floor level to create 3 additional studio flats in connection with PLAN/2017/0070 (prior notification for a proposed change of use of offices (B1) to dwelling (C3) – conversion of the upper floors to provide 15 apartments (12 x studios and 3 x One-bedroom flats)).

The Planning Officer emphasised that the only matters before the Committee were the internal variations to the basement and ground floor layouts of the office and retail units at Regent House, together with internal changes at first, second and third floor levels to accommodate three additional studio flats. Prior approval for the creation of fifteen apartments had already been given, so was not for the Committee to consider.

Councillor Lyons expressed concerns about the development, but accepted that the Committee could do nothing about what had received prior approval. His remaining concern was that no additional parking was being proposed for the three additional units. He proposed and it was duly seconded by Councillor Morales that the application be refused on the basis that there was insufficient car parking.

The Planning Officer advised the Committee that (i) the Highway Authority had raised no concerns about the level of car parking, (ii) the application site was in a very accessible town centre location and (iii) the application site was within the CPZ, so the proposed development would not contribute to parking congestion.

Councillor Ashall commented that the Committee needed to be satisfied that any refusal of the application was on grounds which could be supported.

The Development Manager emphasised the position as explained by the Planning Officer. He did not consider that a refusal would be supported on appeal.

Councillor Morales stated that she was no longer seconding the proposal to refuse the application, following which Councillor Lyons withdrew his proposal to refuse it.

In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion, before the Committee, to approve the application. The votes for and against approval of the application were recorded as follows:-

In favour:                                 Cllrs S Ashall, A Boote, G W Elson, N Martin and S Hussain.

                                                TOTAL: 5

Against:                                   Cllrs T Aziz and L S Lyons.

                                                TOTAL: 2

Present but not voting:            Cllrs G G Chrystie (Chairman) and L M N Morales.

                                                TOTAL: 2

The application was therefore approved.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and legal agreement set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for the construction of six additional car parking spaces.

The Committee considered that an additional condition should be imposed requiring the provision of an electric charging point for one car parking space (which could either be an existing car parking space or one of the proposed spaces).

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and the additional condition referred to above.

The Committee considered an application for the erection of two log cabins within the grounds of the existing care home.

The Committee considered that an additional condition should be imposed requiring the submission and approval of materials (with approval delegated to the Development Manager).

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and the additional condition referred to above.

The Committee considered an application for the erection of 6 x stables and barn, tie-up shelter, muck heap and laying of hard standing by access into field and increase height of entrance gate (part-retrospective).

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for the demolition of an existing single storey lean-to and erection of first floor rear extension and pitched roof to existing single storey element.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.