Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Chris Blow, Ruth Brothwell and Colin Cross.  Councillors Tony Rooth, Bob McShee and Dennis Booth attended as substitutes respectively.  In addition, Councillor David Bilbè sent his apologies with no substitute.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, you must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

21/P/01811 – Guildford Plaza (former Buryfield House), Portsmouth Road, Guildford, GU2 4DH

Councillor Angela Goodwin declared a non-pecuniary interest in the above application by virtue of the fact that she was a Trustee of the Caleb Lovejoy Alms Houses but confirmed that this would not affect her objectivity in considering the application.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 January 2022 as attached at Item 3. A copy of the minutes will be placed on the dais prior to the meeting.

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 12 January 2022 were approved and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee.

The Committee noted the procedures for determining planning applications.

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for the erection of four buildings of between 4 and 6 storeys to provide up to 301 units of Co-Living accommodation (Sui Generis) together with associated communal facilities, basement level to provide access, vehicle and cycle parking, plant and refuse enclosure, with associated groundworks and landscaping.

Prior to consideration of the application, the following persons addressed the Committee in accordance with Public Speaking Procedure Rules 3(b):

·         Ms Marie Hanlan (to object)

·         Mr Duncan Tindale (Tiger Developments Ltd) (In Support) and;

·         Mr Paul Landsberg (Barton Wilmore) (In Support)

The Committee received a presentation from Specialist Development Management Majors, John Busher.  The Committee noted the supplementary late sheets which included some typo corrections and one additional late representation from a resident.  The application was for the construction of a co-living scheme on the site of the former Burymead House, Portsmouth Road.  The development would consist of 301 residential units with an array of internal and external communal areas.  The site was located within the town centre and urban area.  Burymead House had been demolished in the early 2000’s in anticipation of re-development and was an office building up to 10 storeys in height.  The site already had two extant planning permissions in place, one for an office development and the second in 2018 for an assisted living scheme which in terms of design was virtually identical to that proposed in this application, except for a different pattern of fenestration and external materials as well as a slight reduction in some building heights.  The 2018 scheme was therefore a significant material planning consideration.  The site was located within the Millmead and Portsmouth Road Conservation Area as well as a number of listed buildings close to the site including those on Berry Street. 

The proposal was split into four individual blocks with each block split into two sections of different heights and roof forms.  The height and massing of the buildings were virtually the same as the extant scheme with slight reductions in height compared to the approved scheme.  Residents would have their own private studios and living space but was shared with a large area of communal space for residents which included a coffee bar and gym that would be maintained by the owner in perpetuity.  Fifty-two of the apartments would have a private communal meal space provided. The outdoor space would be split into an upper courtyard with lower-level seating areas and landscaping.

The Committee noted that despite some minor reductions in height made to the buildings proposed and changes to materials and fenestration, the current proposal was virtually identical to the assisted living scheme which was approved by the Committee in 2018.  In terms of design and appearance, officers were still of the view that the proposal was acceptable, subject to conditions to control materials, landscaping and window details.  It was also acknowledged that the site was within the Millmead and Portsmouth Road Conservation Area, in close proximity to a number of Grade II  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL5

Prior to consideration of the application, the following persons addressed the Committee in accordance with Public Speaking Procedure Rules 3(b):

·         Mr Dave Burnett (to object);

·         Cllr Pat Oven (on behalf of Send Parish Council) (to object) and;

·         Mr Thomas Rumble (Agent) (In Support)

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for proposed erection of 8 dwellings (C3 use class) with associated access, landscaping and parking, following demolition of Waterside Farm Cottage, outbuildings and Wharf Lane garages.

The Committee received a presentation from Specialist, Development Management Applications Officer, Katie Williams.  The proposed development was identical to that proposed under a previous application, 21/P/01581 which was the subject of a non-determination appeal.  This application was considered by the Planning Committee on 1 December 2021 and the Council’s decision was that it would have approved the application had an appeal against non-determination not been lodged.  The Committee also noted the supplementary late sheets which detailed a correction to the tree report reference.

The application was located within the settlement of Send which had been inset from the Green Belt following the adoption of the 2019 Local Plan.  The site was within the corridor of the River Wey, adjacent to the Wey Navigation Conservation Area and also within the 400 metre to 5-kilometre buffer zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area.  The site lay outside of flood zones 2 and 3.  The site was currently comprised of a detached bungalow and its outbuildings, together with a small area of parking which was currently owned by the Council.  The surrounding area included residential properties along Wharf Lane and an area of open space called Heathfield Nature Reserve.  A public footpath also ran through to the Wey Navigation.

A new vehicular access was proposed where the existing access to the garages was located and followed the existing hedge line through to a new residential cul-de-sac consisting of semi-detached and detached dwellings.  The housing mix was for 2x2 beds, 4x3 beds and 2x4 beds.  There was a total of 21 parking spaces, three of which would be allocated for visitors.  A parking court was proposed to replace the current garaging replacing the eight garages with eight parking spaces. The existing pedestrian access through to the nature reserve would be retained as well as several mature trees on the site boundaries along with new tree planting.  The development offered opportunities to restore and enhance biodiversity and the applicant had submitted an Ecological Management Plan as part of the application which would aim to offset the proposed loss of trees and hedging.  With enhanced planting and ecological mitigation measures and also a pre-commencement condition recommended the proposed development was considered by planning officers to not result in harm to the nearby Site of Nature Conservation importance which incorporated the Wey Navigation.     

Planning officers had no objection to the principle of development on this site.  The proposal would deliver a net increase of seven new homes in a sustainable location.  The development would not harmfully affect the character  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL6

The Committee considered the above-mentioned Listed Building Consent application for the partial demolition of the existing wall to enable the erection of 26 houses and flats, associated landscaping, open space, access and parking following demolition of buildings.

Prior to consideration of the application, the following person addressed the Committee in accordance with Public Speaking Procedure Rules 3(b):

Mr John Burns (to object) (read by Sophie Butcher, Democratic Services Officer)

The Committee received a presentation from the Specialist Development Management Applications Officer, Katie Williams.  The Committee noted that the application site was allocated under Policy 44 of the Local Plan for residential development and retail or service users.  The majority of the site had been inset from the Green Belt with just the southern and eastern edges remaining within the Green Belt.  The site fronted onto Ripley High Street and the application sought listed Building Consent for the partial demolition of the curtilage listed.  A previous application for residential development on the site was granted at appeal in 2016 and included the demolition of the same section of listed wall as proposed under this current application.  The listed wall was associated with the Talbot Hotel which was a Grade II star listed building.  

The listed building application sought listed Building consent for the partial demolition of the curtilage listed wall.  The same partial demolition was considered under the earlier appeal application where the Inspector allowed the appeal granting the acceptability of creating an opening through the existing wall.  The harm caused was considered to be less than substantial and was outweighed by the benefits of enabling the redevelopment of the site, subject to conditions to ensure details were secured for the demolition and repair schedule.  The Listed Building Consent could not be implemented until planning permission was secured for residential redevelopment of the site and was therefore recommended for approval. 

The Committee queried why it was being asked to decide the Listed Building Consent application before a decision had been made on the actual planning application which was for 26 units.  This report referred to the main planning application, stating that a terrace of three dwellings fronting the High Street would enhance the setting of the Conservation Area.  If this therefore was part of the consideration of the recommendation to approve, the Committee therefore agreed that it was not in a position to make that decision until it had seen the details of the main planning application.   The site was also allocated in the Local Plan A44 for approximately 26 homes and 90 square metres of retail or service units.  The Committee agreed to defer this application until both applications could be considered together.

A motion was moved and seconded to defer application 20/P/01058 until it could be considered along with the main application for this site 20/P/01057. (Post meeting note: both applications are now scheduled to be considered by the Planning Committee at its meeting on 2 March 2022). 

Committee members are asked to note the details of Appeal Decisions as attached at Item 6.

The Committee noted and discussed the planning appeal decisions.