Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Chris Barrass, Chris Blow and Paul Spooner.  Councillors Tony Rooth, Deborah Seabrook and Jan Harwood attended as substitutes respectively.  Councillor Fiona White sent her apologies and Councillor Colin Cross acted as Chairman in her absence.

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/00428 – Howard of Effingham School

Councillor Liz Hogger declared a non-pecuniary interest in the above application and stated that although she is a member of Effingham Parish Council, she did not comment or vote on any planning applications which come before the parish council. She did not therefore participate in the parish council’s decision to object to this application.

Secondly, her husband is a trustee for Effingham Village Recreation Trust, which owns the KGV Fields to the south of the application site. He has submitted an objection on behalf of the Trust and not in a personal capacity.

Councillor Hogger confirmed that neither of these issues would affect her judgement on this application, and she would approach the discussion on the application tonight with an open mind to all the arguments made.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 2 February 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 2 February 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 noted that the above application had been deferred.  Due to the scale of the application and proximity to a Grade II* listed building there was a requirement to consult Historic England.  This had not taken place.  In the absence of a statutory consultation a decision could not be made on the applications.  Officers had now initiated the consultation and would bring the items to the next available planning committee updating Members on the response from Historic England.

The Committee noted that the above application had been deferred.  Due to the scale of the application and proximity to a Grade II* listed building there was a requirement to consult Historic England.  This had not taken place.  In the absence of a statutory consultation a decision could not be made on the applications.  Officers had now initiated the consultation and would bring the items to the next available planning committee updating Members on the response from Historic England.

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

·         Mr Ian Symes (Chairman of Effingham Parish Council) (to object)

·         Ms Vivien White (Chairman of Effingham Residents Association) (to object)

·         Mr David Gilchrist (Agent) (In Support)

The Committee considered the above-mentioned Reserved Matters application pursuant to outline permission 14/P/02109 approved on 21/03/2018, to consider appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in respect of 99 dwellings.

The Committee received a presentation from Specialist Development Management Majors Officer, John Busher.  The Committee noted the supplementary late sheets as some changes had been made to the southern and eastern boundaries of the application site, an amendment to condition 14 and a new condition.  This was a reserved matters application for the construction of 99 dwellings following approval of outline planning permission by the Secretary of State in 2018 as part of the Effingham School development.  The main phase of the development was planned on the Lodge Farm site. The site was located outside of but adjoining to Effingham Conservation Area and Little Bookham Conservation Area which was in Mole Valley.  The site was previously Green Belt land.  Residential properties were located mainly to the west, King George Recreation Ground to the south and to the east a school and a church.  The planning officer referred to the Masterplan which had been approved by the Secretary of State.  The largest part of the application site was set on the northern side of the road which included houses and the replacement secondary school and a smaller residential development accessed off Brown’s lane.  The Inspector considered the Masterplan as part of the appeal.  The access from Lower Road led to a central open space in the middle of the site leading to cul-de-sacs with a variety of dwellings and apartment units.  The approved parameter plans were also referred to by the Planning Officer, also considered by the Planning Inspector, which showed the approved building height parameters at two and a half storeys in height which was considered acceptable in those areas.  A potential pedestrian/cycle link was proposed along the eastern boundary which would link Lower Road into King George the Fifth Recreation grounds. 

The Committee noted that the appeal layout plan had been amended on a number of occasions to deal with issues raised by planning officers and residents.  The main changes were focused on the eastern portion of the site where a much improved arrangement of buildings fronting onto the spine road had been achieved.  Previously, the dwellings were located side onto the access road and the applicant had changed it so all the dwellings fronted onto the streetscene.  The applicant had also swapped the terrace of four dwellings with an apartment block on the eastern boundary.  The apartment block now had an active frontage onto Lower Road therefore improving the streetscene.  The larger blocks were also located further away from the listed buildings and the conservation areas.  The terrace of 4 dwellings  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL7

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

·         Mr Oscar de Chazal (to object) and;

·         Ms Mary Adkins (to object)

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for provision of a water tap and a manhole to facilitate the provision of a mains water supply for the purposes of agriculture. 

The Committee received a presentation from the planning officer, John Busher.  The Committee noted that the application was for planning permission for a tap and manhole cover on land off Westwood Lane in Wanborough.  The site was comprised of part of an agricultural field, in the Green Belt and an Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV) and located outside of the AONB boundary.  The Committee noted the supplementary late sheets where it had been incorrectly stated in the report that the site was within the AONB but the site actually sits outside of it.  An additional comment had also been received from the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty officer.

The site was largely open and undeveloped and the proposed tap was very similar to an application the Committee had approved back in May 2021.  The application sought permission for a water tap and no other development was proposed.  The land remained in agricultural use.  The application did not seek material change to the use of the land.  Given the development was for an engineering operation in the Green Belt, the only consideration was the impact on the surrounding openness.  As the proposed was for a tap and manhole cover, officers did not believe that there would be any loss of openness or discernable harm to the Green Belt nor impact on its character or appearance and had therefore recommended the application for approval.

The Committee discussed the application and noted that a significant piece of beautiful and open landscape had been sold off in various lots, in some cases to plant trees which would need water as well as possibly to graze livestock on.  The Committee noted concerns therefore that this would not be the last tap application and the recommendation that the Article 4 Direction that covered this land was placed as an informative if it was approved.

The Committee noted that enforcement action was a regular activity on the adjacent site.  Concern was noted that a tap or a proposal for tree planting would impact on the views in and out of the AGLV and views of the AONB as well as an impact on the openness.  The planting of trees or use of livestock on the land would also require the erection of fences which was contrary to the Article 4 Direction as it would break up the openness of the land.  The fields also flooded regularly and therefore the need for a tap was questioned.

The Head of Place, Dan Ledger confirmed that the Committee had to consider the application before it for a tap.  The proposal was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL8

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

·         Mr David Neame (Agent) (in support)

The Committee considered the full application for the erection of 38 no. dwellings, vehicular and pedestrian access, car parking and cycle storage together with associated landscaping and servicing (description amended 02/11/2021).

The Committee received a presentation from Jo Trask, Planning Officer.  The Committee noted that there was a typo in condition 7 where reference to sooner should be replaced with ‘season’.  The application site was allocated for housing under policy A31 and fell within the urban area of Ash and Tongham.  The site was also located within 400 metres to 5 kilometres of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA).  The site was also adjoined to a nature conservation area and a footpath ran along the western boundary.  A total of 36 dwellings were proposed, comprising of a mix of detached and semi-detached flat and terrace style properties.  Allocated and visitor parking would also be provided within the site.  The site approved in 2020 was granted planning permission for 35 units and had been implemented.  The proposed scheme sought an additional three units on a large site area and were accommodated on plot A.  The majority of the built form would be located in the middle of the plot therefore retaining the existing rural character as per the already approved scheme. 

Planning officers accepted that there would be an inevitable change in the character and appearance of the land.  The principle of development had already been found to be acceptable in the granting of the 35 units in 2020.  The scheme currently proposed a net increase of 3 units on a slightly enlarged area.  The proposal complied with the development plan and would not result in any material harm to the character of the area.  The landscape buffer around the site would also be retained and would help the development integrate into its site.  The proposed dwellings were considered to provide a good level of internal and external amenity for future residents.  There would be no unacceptable harm to neighbouring residents and subject to conditions, the scheme would also be acceptable I terms of highway safety, trees, ecology, archaeology and sustainable construction.  The planning officers recommendation was therefore to approve the application subject to a S106 agreement which would secure 40% affordable housing on site, contributions towards Thames Basin Heath mitigation, education, Ash Road Bridge Highways and NHS healthcare.  

The Committee discussed the application and concerns raised that Tongham Parish Council had in fact been consulted given it referred to Ash Parish Council in the report.  The Committee welcomed the good proportion of affordable housing offered as part of the development proposal.  The Committee also sought clarification on the number of visitor parking spaces to be provided.

The Head of Place, Dan Ledger, confirmed that Tongham Parish Council had been consulted with and the reference to Ash Parish Council was a typo.  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL9

The Committee discussed and noted the appeal decisions.