Agenda item

[NOTE: In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Mr Brian Denmee attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and the applicant/agent was unable to attend to address the Committee.]

The Committee considered the construction of a three storey block of flats comprising eight units with associated parking, refuse and amenity following the demolition of existing bungalow.

Following a question it was noted that the elevations of the proposed development were not illustrated accurately on the presentation slides, but the Officers report did refer correctly to the elevations; the north elevation would be the front and the south elevation the back. Following an additional question the Planning Officer confirmed that there was capacity on site to accommodate the parking spaces and Surrey County Council had been consulted on highway safety and had raised no objections.

Regarding the 45 degree angle rule, the Planning Officer had concluded that the application would need to demonstrate a significant fail over and above the current situation for this to be a reason for refusal. It was noted that there was a 14.5m separation distance from the closest property at number 6.

Some Members raised issues with privacy for neighbouring properties, however the Planning Officer thought this had been addressed in the conditions with glazed and non-opening windows etc. Some Members also thought that the design was not in keeping with the local area.

Councillor D Roberts commented that he had concerns around car parking and that this did not provide any visitor spaces. Councillor D Roberts thought that there were elements to commend about the application but that the bulk and mass was too large for the site. Councillor D Roberts proposed, and it was duly seconded by Councillor A Boote, that the application should be refused on the grounds of bulk and mass.

Some Members liked the application before them and commented that the road was already diverse and that the development would fit in fine. Some Members also commented that is the Committee were minded to overturn the Planning Officers recommendation then they should have a very solid planning reason for doing so.

The Chairman commented that although this application met our parking standards, the policy stated that visitor spaces should be encouraged however none had been included in those provided. Some Councillor thought that this was insufficient parking for eight flats, especially when you took visitors into account. The Planning Officers advised that this was quite a minor scheme contributing to the housing supply of Woking; it met the minimum parking standards and considering the low units proposed they did not think we could go back to the developer and ask for more spaces.

Some Members of the Committee thought that we should be encouraging these types of development as it was a good mix of housing that met our minimum standards and was in a location close to the town centre and the train station. Some Members of the Committee were sympathetic to the objectors, but did not think they could support the motion to refuse as it met our policies.

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 A Boote and D Roberts.

                                 TOTAL:  2

Against:                              Cllrs T Aziz, J Brown, S Dorsett, D Hughes, N Martin and C Rana.

                                 TOTAL:  6

Present but not voting:      Cllrs L M N Morales (Chairman)

                                 TOTAL:  1

The application was therefore not refused.

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

In favour:                           Cllrs T Aziz, J Brown, S Dorsett, D Hughes, N Martin and C Rana.

                                 TOTAL:  6

Against:                              Cllrs A Boote and D Roberts.

                                 TOTAL:  2

Present but not voting:      Cllrs L M N Morales (Chairman)

                                 TOTAL:  1

The application was therefore approved.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to conditions and S106 Agreement.