Agenda item

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for proposed erection of a two storey replacement dwelling with retention of existing garage together with alterations to parking and vehicular access arrangements to provide for an in/out access way.

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

·        Mr Gavin Teague (in support) and;

·        Mr Gary Lonie (in support)

The Committee received a report from the Senior Planning Officer, Becky Souter.  The Committee noted the supplementary late sheets which detailed an error in the report relating to the width and depth of the proposed dwelling.  The application had come to the Planning Committee owing to receiving more than 20 letters/emails of support which were contrary to the officer’s recommendation.

The Committee noted that the application related to a property known as Woodlands located within the Warren which was a private road in East Horsley.  The site was located within the Green Belt and had been subject to a number of applications for a replacement dwelling in the last five years.  The impact on the Green Belt has always been the primary reason for refusal over the course of the previous four applications.  There have also been two planning appeals dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate.  A parcel of land to the south of the site had been developed during this time and was subject to an appeal decision in 2019 which permitted the construction of a large single dwelling house.  Reference had been made to the site by the applicant and in third party comments.  However, the site was subject to a different Green Belt test as limited infill and under that was not considered inappropriate development in the Green Belt.  In the last planning appeal on the application site, reference was made to this neighbouring dwelling, where the Inspector noted that the neighbouring situation was not comparable to the replacement dwelling proposed and as such should be given limited weight in any balance.

For the purposes of this application, we must take the starting point that the development was inappropriate in the Green Belt unless it meets one of the exceptions set out in paragraph 149d.  The relevant exception in this case is in relation to the replacement of a building, provided that the new building was in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces.

The Committee noted the proposed site layout and footprint of the dwelling.  The existing garage was to be retained and the alterations to the vehicular access would consist of the creation of an in and out driveway with a new access point.  To facilitate the access, trees would have to be removed and no objection was raised to their loss.  With regard to the existing and proposed front elevations, the design was considered to be appropriate to the character of the surrounding area and the dwelling would respect the existing streetscene.  The indicative material palette was considered acceptable.  The open sided wooden frame structures were constructed using permitted development rights in 2020.  The existing elevation has a much narrower first floor which falls away to a single storey element.  This was where the proposal would add significant bulk.  When comparing the existing and proposed ground floor plans, the wooden frame structures are not taken into account for the purposes of the Green Belt assessment when considering the extent of the existing building.  The applicant had accepted this position.  It had been established from the many refusals and in the appeal decision for the 2021 application that these cannot be taken to be comparable to brick built form and were constructed artificially to increase the scale of the building for the purposes of gaining a planning permission.  The proposed dwelling was greater in every respect compared to the existing property, with the most substantial uplift at first floor level where significant bulk would be created with over a 46% increase in floor area.  The proposed dwelling would be 32% greater in volume and in the previous appeal decision, the Inspector had concluded that a 20% volumetric increase would be significant.

The main issue in relation to this application was that it represented inappropriate development in the Green Belt which was not outweighed by any very special circumstances and as such was recommended for refusal. 

The Chairperson, Councillor King permitted Councillor Catherine Young to speak in her capacity as ward councillor for three minutes.  The Committee noted concerns raised that the application should not be refused.  It had support from all of the local neighbours as well as East Horsley Parish Council who were a statutory consultee and did not object.  The applicant had addressed the concerns that had been raised previously and now produced plans for a family home that significantly minimised any harm to the openness of the Green Belt.  As stated in the applicant’s planning statement, the floor area had been reduced from 372sqm to 299sqm, which was a reduction of 73sqm with an original building size of 2 to 7sqm.  The increase was just over 30% which represented a minimal increase.  At Guildford anything above 40% was unacceptable but this was well below that.  Therefore the application should be approved as it met the tests of paragraph 149d of the NPPF, being a replacement dwelling in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces.  It also satisfied the local plan policy whereby the application for the new home met the definition of a replacement dwelling as it would be delivered on virtually the same footprint as the original.  The proposal, taking into consideration its compliance with numerous other planning policies on balance outweighed any perceived harm to the Green Belt.   

The Senior Planning Officer, Becky Souter, in response to comments made by public speakers confirmed that the volumetric figure of 32% was what was provided by the planning agent for the application and was also in the Planning Statement. 

The Committee discussed the application and noted that it was very unusual to have an application where there was mass support from the neighbours and parish council for a proposal.   Given there was already a house onsite, according to the NPPF and local policies, it could not be considered as inset to the Green Belt.  However, the neighbouring house which had been built was considerably larger than that proposed.  It was considered that the proposal on balance did not represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.  The proposal would not materially harm the Green Belt or cause any difficulties to any of the neighbours.

The Committee also noted comments that the current application had to be looked at on its own merits and that the officer recommendation to refuse was the right one given that the proposal would impact upon the Green Belt owing to the material increase over the existing property.  

The Council’s legal advisor, Angela Watson drew members back to the wording of NPPF 149.  This was the starting point and to note that this application was contrary to the definitions as laid out in the NPPF and Guildford’s own policies.  Members were cautioned against putting too much weight on the support the application had received from neighbours given that another similar application received in the future may have no support for it by neighbours.  Members were reminded to be consistent in the planning decisions that they took.

The Chairperson, Councillor King stated that it had become apparent through the course of the debate that committee members did not support the officer recommendation.

Councillor Patrick Oven therefore moved a motion to approve the application which Councillor Maddy Redpath seconded and was carried.

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

RESOLVED that delegated authority was given to the Executive Head of Planning to grant application 23/P/01774 subject to the addition of appropriate conditions as detailed below. 

1.     The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51(1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.     The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1502-108C; 1502-110A; 1502-111A; 1502-112A and 1502-113A received on 23/10/2023.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and in the interests of proper planning.

3.     Prior to the commencement of development, a SAP output document shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall demonstrate the Dwelling Fabric Energy Efficiency (DFEE) value is at least 10% lower than the Target Fabric Energy Efficiency (TFEE) value set by Building Regulations. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development and retained as operational thereafter.

Reason: To reduce carbon emissions and incorporate energy efficiency in accordance with the Council’s 'Climate Change, Sustainable Design, Construction and Energy' SPD 2020.

4.     No development shall commence until a Site Waste Management Plan has been submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority that demonstrates how waste generated from construction and excavation activities would be dealt with in accordance with the waste hierarchy. The Site Waste Management Plan will subsequently be kept up-to-date throughout the development process in accordance with the established methodology.

Reason: To ensure that the development takes waste hierarchy into account to manage waste. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because waste will begin to be generated as soon as any development commences on the site.

5. No development, above slab level, shall take place until details and samples of the proposed external facing and roofing materials including colour and finish have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and samples.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory.

6. No development, above slab level, shall take place until a scheme to enhance the nature conservation interest of the site has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved.

Reason: To increase the biodiversity of the site and mitigate any impact from the development.

7. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless and until the proposed dwelling is provided with a fast charge socket (current minimum requirements - 7kw Mode 3 with Type 2 connector - 230v AC 32 Amp single phase dedicated supply) in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sustainability.

8. The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until facilities for the secure, covered parking of bicycles and the provision of a charging point with timer for e-bikes by said facilities have been provided within the development site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter the said approved facilities shall be provided, retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users.

9. The development hereby permitted must comply with regulation 36 paragraph 2(b) of the Building Regulations 2010 (as amended) to achieve a water efficiency of 110 litres per occupant per day (described in part G2 of the Approved Documents 2015). Before occupation, a copy of the wholesome water consumption calculation notice (described at regulation 37 (1) of the Building Regulations 2010 (as amended)) shall be provided to the planning department to demonstrate that this condition has been met.

Reason: To improve water efficiency in accordance with the Climate Change, Sustainable Design, Construction and Energy SPD 2020.

10. No external lighting shall be installed on the site or affixed to any buildings on the site unless the local planning authority has first approved in writing details of the position, height, design, measures to control light spillage and intensity of illumination. Only the approved details shall be installed.

Reason: In the interests of minimising the impact of development on protected species.