Agenda item

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

·         Councillor David Semple (Shalford Parish Council) (to object)

·         Ms Sarah Singleton (to object)

·         Mr Dominic Kay (Barchester Healthcare) (in support)

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for erection of a care home (use Class C2) with parking, access, landscaping and other associated works following demolition of the existing structure.  (Amended plans received 01.02.21 revised footprint, landscaping, refuse strategy, external materials and appearance). 

The Committee was informed by the planning officer that the proposed erection of a care home would provide 60 ensuite bedrooms as well as a residents café, hair and beauty salon, library, cinema and communal activities space.  The site was in a sustainable location with good access to services and public transport.  The buildings to be removed had some historic and architectural interest but were not considered of sufficient quality to warrant statutory protection or inclusion on a local list of significant buildings.  There were therefore no reasonable grounds to resist the demolition of the existing building and there was no objection to its replacement with a new building.  Access to the development would remain via the existing access track which led to a new car park area and included 24 car parking spaces, 12 bicycle spaces, an ambulance bay and a turning area for refuse vehicles.  The proposed building would be predominantly two and a half storeys with a third storey floor of accommodation contained within the roofspace.  Officers considered that the building was of a good quality design and that the articulation and carefully considered use of materials would ensure that the building would not cause any harm to the character or appearance of the building.  Concern had been raised in relation to the impact upon an elm tree on adjoining land, however, following submission of amended plans, the Council’s Arboricultural Officer had assessed the tree and concluded that the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact upon it.  A landscaping strategy also demonstrated how the removal of some low-quality trees would be replaced and how the remaining garden would be used for the benefit of future residents. 

In conclusion, the proposed development was considered to be of good quality and design which included materials using architectural details that were sympathetic to the character of the local area.  Whilst the building would be of a greater scale than the existing, the design could nevertheless be accommodated without causing harm to its surroundings.  It would not harm the special landscape or character of the wider area nor result in any material impact on local amenities and would not prejudice highway or pedestrian safety.  The level of parking proposed was considered to be appropriate for the scale of the development and supported the principle of sustainable travel.  The development accorded with the provisions of the Development Plan and the relevant national planning policy guidance.     

The Committee discussed the application and noted concerns raised that the proposed development would impact the character of the village and the views into and out of it.  The character of the existing building was valued by local residents whilst the proposed building was perceived as too large for the one-acre plot and would be detrimental to the neighbouring properties enjoyment of their amenities.  The access road was narrow and would restrict access to ambulances and fire services vehicles. 

In response to comments made, the planning officer confirmed that the report did assess the impact of the proposed development upon neighbouring amenity which was found to be acceptable.  In addition, Surrey County Council’s Highway Authority was satisfied with the access arrangements and contributions had been sought as part of the S106 agreement secured as part of a Travel Plan.

The Committee also queried the number of staff who would be working at the care home which was confirmed could not be found in the Design Access Statement.  A total of twenty-four parking spaces were to be provided and the Committee asked how many would be accessible.  The planning officer confirmed that the Design and Access Statement provided for accessible communal spaces and accessible paths however it did not confirm how many accessible parking spaces would be provided but would very probably be covered.  The Committee noted that approx. 20 staff would be working on three separate shifts so the number of people onsite at any one time would be manageable.  However, the number of electric vehicle charging points was less than a quarter of that required to meet our sustainability targets.  The planning officer confirmed that the number of electric vehicle charging points was managed by Surrey Highways Authority and not Guildford Borough Council and was therefore difficult to secure additional charging points.  The Committee also discussed whether it was possible to include a landscape boundary treatment condition so that additional planting could be secured at the back of the car parking spaces to provide relief from the traffic.  The planning officer confirmed that an additional landscaping condition could be sought.

The Committee agreed on balance that the proposed development represented a modern building that was fit for purpose.  The County Highways Authority had raised no objections to the parking arrangements. 

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

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

RESOLVED to approve application 20/P/0129, subject to the additional landscaping boundary treatment condition:

(i)            That a s.106 agreement be entered into to secure:

·         A contribution of £7000 towards the cost of works to reduce the width of the access track

·         A contribution of £45,000 toward road safety improvements to include the creation of a pedestrian refuge and highway widening on Kings Road/Christmas Hill.

·         A contribution of £4,600 towards the cost of Surrey County Council auditing the Travel Plan

If the terms of the S.106 or wording or the planning conditions are significantly amended as part of ongoing s.106 or planning contribution(s) negotiations any changes shall be agreed in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning Committee and lead Ward Member. 

(ii)           That upon completion of the above, the application be determined by the Planning Development Manager.