Agenda item

23/P/00139 - 176 Epsom Road, Guildford, GU1 2RR

Minutes:

(Councillors David Bilbé and Steven Lee had left the meeting and were not present for the discussion or vote taken in relation to this application).

 

The Committee considered the above-mentioned outline application with all matters reserved except for access for the demolition of the existing residential dwelling and outbuildings and erection of 4 dwellings (C3) with associated infrastructure (amended plans and amended description 11 September 2024). 

 

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

 

·        Mrs Julie Williams (to object);

·        Mrs Anna Gould-Mets (to object);

·        Mrs Carol Benson (in support) (online) and;

·        Mr Ross Mayger (in support)

 

The Committee received a presentation from the Team Leader, Justin Williams.  The application site was located within the urban area and a residential area of Guildford which was comprised of a mixed style of properties with a proposal resulting in a net increase of three residential units.  The plans have been revised during the course of the application with a number of units reduced from six to four.  There was an existing access road which served both 176 and 178 Epsom Road who had access towards the front.  There was also a traffic light pedestrian crossing outside of the site.

 

The Committee noted the proposed indicative site layout plan with access as the only matter to be considered.  The site was already planted densely with trees and the existing boundary would be planted as much as possible.

 

The Committee noted that 28 emails of objection had been received and a letter of support.  A further letter of representation had been received following the publication of the agenda and was detailed on the late sheets, along with an additional condition recommended by the Council’s Tree Officer.  Planning officers were satisfied that the proposal would comply with policies in the Local Plan and was recommended for approval subject to conditions as detailed in the report and on the supplementary late sheets.

 

 

The Committee queried whether the Council’s own refuse team had been consulted about the waste collection and noted that as a result of that consultation the location of the bin stores was revised.  The Committee were reassured that Highways would have looked at access for key service vehicles such as ambulances and fire engines to the site and had raised no objections to the proposed scheme on these grounds.   

 

The Committee noted that there would be sufficient room for the construction traffic and the access road would be the same.  There would also be individual bins allocated for each household.  The Committee noted that if access was granted this was on the basis of access for up to four properties and no more.  Concerns were expressed regarding the level of traffic on Epsom Road and that it would be better through High Path Road, however this was not for consideration as it was not part of the application.  

 

The Committee queried whether the woodland called The Spinney was in public ownership?  It was confirmed by the Team Leader that this woodland was outside of the application site and was not owned by the applicant. 

 

The Committee noted that in the officer’s report it had been stated that the application did not comprise of backland development but would replace an existing form of backland development.  The Team Leader confirmed that this proposal could be described as backland development because it was located behind a couple of properties along Epsom Road, no’s 178, 180 and 182.

 

The Committee also received confirmation that whilst this application only dealt with access and demolition of the existing property, design issues would be dealt with at the reserved matters stage.

 

The Chairperson, Councillor Vanessa King therefore moved the officer recommendation to approve application 23/P/00139, subject to the additional condition in relation to the requirement for an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan to be submitted and approved in writing by the LPA, as detailed on the supplementary late sheet and Councillor Dominique Williams seconded that motion which was carried. 

 

RECORDED VOTE LIST

 

 

COUNCILLOR

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAIN

1

The Deputy Mayor, Cllr Howard Smith

 

 

X

2

Cllr Cait Taylor

X

 

 

3

Cllr Bilal Akhtar

X

 

 

4

Cllr Maddy Redpath

X

 

 

5

Cllr Joss Bigmore

X

 

 

6

Cllr Pat Oven

X

 

 

7

Cllr Richard Mills

X

 

 

8

Cllr Dominique Williams

X

 

 

9

Cllr Joanne Shaw

X

 

 

10

Cllr Vanessa King

X

 

 

11

Cllr Lizzie Griffiths

X

 

 

12

Cllr Stephen Hives

X

 

 

13

Cllr Gillian Harwood

X

 

 

 

TOTALS

12

 

1

 

 

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

 

RESOLVED to approve application 23/P/00139 subject to an additional condition subject to the additional condition in relation to the requirement for an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan to be submitted and approved in writing by the LPA as detailed on the supplementary late sheets and:

 

That delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning to grant planning permission subject to a Unilateral Undertaking being entered into to secure the provision of SANG and SAMM Contributions in accordance with the adopted tariff of the SPA Avoidance Strategy to mitigate against the impact on the Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area.        

 

The Committee agreed at 10:30pm to extend the meeting by a further fifteen minutes so that the next two last applications on the agenda could be considered.

 

 

 

Supporting documents: