Agenda item

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for demolition of existing Cathedral Close dwellings and erection 124 no. residential units (including affordable housing) with associated engineering works, access, landscaping, parking and ancillary works.

The Committee received a presentation from the Senior Planning Officer, Kelly Jethwa. The Committee noted that the applicant and third parties had submitted their speeches had the item been eligible for public speaking.  These had been treated as comments on the application, and any new matters summarised on the supplementary late sheets.

The application site was allocated for the development of approx. 100 homes in the Local Plan.  A previous application for the site was refused in 2017 by Linden Homes for 134 homes.  The Cathedral appointed a new developer, Vivid Homes, a well known affordable housing provider.  Pre-application discussions were entered into with the Council prior to the submission of the application which also involved a Design Review Panel. 

The site formed part of the suburban growth of Guildford which had occurred since the Second World War.  The town was located to the east and south-east of the site.  The Cathedral was a landmark building on a hilltop location with a strong silhouette.  The University of Surrey campus was located to the north and east and residential suburban housing to the south.  The A3 was located to the west. 

The Cathedral was a Grade II star listed building.  A western processional route by car was proposed along with a pedestrian route from the south.  The site formed part of the former hunting grounds of the Earl of Onslow.  From the mid-1930’s the Guildford Diocese was created and land begun to be bought for the Cathedral.  In the 1960’s the land to the north was sold to the University of Surrey.  In 1998 land was also sold to a housing developer who built Scholar’s Walk in the south-east corner.   The land for the Cathedral was bought in 1942 and 1943, funded in part by a very generous donation from Viscount Bennett, the former Finance Minister of Canada.  The terms of the gift in any covenant was not a material planning consideration.  However, there was an intangible historic link between Viscount Bennett and the Cathedral which contributed to the significance of this heritage asset.  A letter had been included provided by the Cathedral in their submission from the Bishop of Viscount in October 1942 when they were seeking donors for the purchase of the land.  The recognition of this wartime relationship between the UK and Canada was recorded in a ledger laid in the walls of the Cathedral which was still there today.

The proposal required the demolition of seven existing detached homes currently offered to staff of the Cathedral.  The development would comprise of three character areas, the eastern meadow, the eastern slopes and the western parcel.  Amended plans were also received in December 2022 which were summarised in the report.  The scheme incorporated on-site renewable energy regeneration.  The proposal would also lead to a land receipt that the Cathedral could invest and the endowment would provide an income for the repair and maintenance of the Cathedral in perpetuity. 

The proposed buildings would be built into the slope where possible however the flats on the eastern slopes would require engineering to re-profile the land.  The apartments would have a subterranean podium level.  Land stability and the approaches had been independently assessed and deemed to be acceptable. 

The proposal would result in 40 vehicle movements per hour in peak times with most movements going east or west.  The access points had been subject of a road safety audit and alternative access from the west through the main route of Stagg Hill would cause greater harm to the heritage asset due to the removal of more trees and the regrading of the ground.  The proposal would not have a harmful impact on highway safety and capacity and as a result there was no objection from the County Highway Authority.  The impact on the highway would be less than the previous scheme by Linden Homes and there would in addition be a comprehensive package of sustainable transport measures including offsite cycle infrastructure and walking facilities including a new link.  There would also be two onsite car club spaces and travel vouchers for each of the new occupants.  There was a suitable level of car parking to ensure there was no overspill parking onto surrounding roads.

The proposal would provide a compliant affordable housing scheme and would provide 13 homes for Cathedral staff with a combination of flats and houses with a range of dwelling sizes.  

The proposal included a new community orchard to the rear of the western parcel with a woodland walkway through the flats.  The existing informal meadow would experience a substantial change by being overlooked by the new houses and private gardens.  The homes to the west would also come closer to the processionary route.  A large number of new trees were proposed to be planted throughout the site including the processionary routes to the south and east.  The greening enhancements would result in a biodiversity net gain.  The landscaping plan identified a number of informal walking routes through the site.  Climbing plants would be grown on the buildings to assist with screening and likely incorporate green roof planting.  The amended plans had increased the spacing in the eastern meadow.  However, this area would experience overlooking and no longer be secluded and allow people to enjoy the amazing view due to the location of the new homes and the terraces facing this space.  The five clergy houses would have raised terraces and whilst they were set back they would still allow views over the meadow area.  They would appear as one and a half storey houses with a stepped house design.  In the summer the buildings would encroach upon the view and would have a permanent impact.  The view of Guildford Castle would also not be appreciated in the same way that it is currently.

The apartment blocks would be located on the eastern slopes with a range of scale of buildings up to three and a half storeys stepped down along the slope.  This would introduce a new arrangement of buildings in this suburban setting which whilst acceptable to make the most efficient use of land for this allocation, would also impact upon the character of the area.  The engineering required would also need a number of retaining walls to be built.  The mass and scale of the tallest blocks had been reduced however there were still a number of projecting balconies.  The form and profile of the blocks would not integrate with the local vernacular.

In terms of the relationship with Scholars Walk, the residential development was located to the south-east.  The existing vehicular access would become a pedestrian route only with additional tree planting.  There was a gap of 20 metres to the shared boundary with changing levels and screening due to the juxtaposition of the buildings which would not result in a material loss of amenity.

The applicant had responded to comments from the Council and the County Council regarding the onsite cycling infrastructure, particularly for the flats.  As a result, direct access would be provided with less doors/automated doors where they were required.  There would be storage for bikes and E-Bike charging points and visitor cycle parking as well.  The scheme had exceeded the requirements in this regard.

The buildings would continue to be visually prominent and would not be relatable particularly in the winter.  Whilst the landscaping would mature over time, the mass and scale would detract from the Cathedral.

A balancing exercise has been carried out in accordance with paragraph 202 of the NPPF.  Less that substantial harm had been identified to the setting of Guildford Cathedral, Guildford Castle and the lodge buildings to the south which was in the low to medium range.  The public benefits had been assessed and weighted accordingly.  Substantial weight had been afforded to the affordable housing provision.  The endowment from the land receipt for the sale of the plot of land would not meet the full cost of the repair for the Cathedral for the next five years.  It would only meet 23% of the cost, depending on when the income accrued would become available with potential additional funding from another land receipt provided by the development.  These public benefits would not outweigh the harm identified, particularly to the setting of the Cathedral.  Other harm had also been identified to the outward view of the eastern meadows which was substantial.  The impact upon these views and the visually prominent built form of development had been given substantial weight.  The benefits of the scheme did not outweigh the heritage harm and other harm identified.

This is a unique and special site in the town and to the community of Guildford.  Therefore, any development on this sensitive site for the Cathedral would have to be exemplar.  This was to ensure this nationally important site was respected and a scheme delivered that in years to come would form part of the heritage asset for this borough.

The proposal had a number of changes incorporated from pre-application stage to determination so to address the matters raised.  However, the proposal would fail to deliver the ten characteristics of a well-designed place, as set out in the National Design Guide and the Development Plan.  The application was therefore recommended for refusal for the amended reasons as set out in the supplementary late sheets along with the additional responses. 

The Committee discussed the application and noted that improvements had been made to this proposal over the last four years particularly with regard to sustainability and the percentage of affordable housing.  It was also considered that some of the aspects of the design and landscaping were sympathetic.  However, fundamentally this was not the location for this scheme.  The Committee noted concerns raised in relation to the proposed scale, density and height of the buildings that would change the Cathedral which was a significant heritage asset.  The site encompassed more that the Cathedral but was part of an open semi-wild space that was appreciated by the whole community.  The parkland provided a very special setting with different short and long range views of the Cathedral.  It provided a sense of proportion for a building as big as the Cathedral, a lot of which would be lost with the scheme proposed.  The application also represented a form of overdevelopment leading to overlooking for the residents of Scholars Walk which was of great concern.  The access routes were creating a potential two-tier system that whilst it was noted was not a highway concern was not sympathetic to the community wanting one route for the eastern scheme and another route for the Cathedral houses.  It was a heritage asset that must be protected. 

The Committee noted that a community orchard had been incorporated into the scheme and questioned the extent to which it would be used.  The development also incorporated chimneys and the Committee was interested to know what sort of fuel was proposed to be used in the development.  The description of half a storey was also questioned when it actually referred to habitable roofspace. 

The planning officers confirmed that the chimneys on the clergy housing proposed were functional chimneys.  Whilst the type of fuel to be used was not known a condition was required to specify it.

The Committee noted comments that substantial weight had to be given to the setting of this grade II star listed building in Guilford which was of historic importance.  Concern was raised regarding the overall layout of the proposed development, apart from the dwellings to be built for the clergy.  The access road was of concern being that only one road in and out of the site was planned and was not suitable.  The harm to the setting of the site was obvious and represented a form of overdevelopment.   

The Senior Planning Officer, Kelly Jethwa confirmed that the access route proposed was the most preferred by the emergency services and refuse collectors.  A second access route was only required when a larger number of dwellings was proposed.  In this case, the access route would meet current standards. 

A motion was moved and seconded to refuse the application which was carried.

In conclusion, having taken account of the representations received in relation to this application, the Committee;

RESOLVED to refuse application 21/P/02333 subject to the amended reasons as detailed in the supplementary late sheets and can be viewed here: 21_P_02333-DECISION_NOTICE-1789148.pdf (guildford.gov.uk)