Agenda item

The following persons addressed the Committee in accordance with Public Speaking Procedure Rules 3(b):

·         Councillor Pat Oven (Send Parish Council) (to object);

·         Mr David Neame (Agent) (in support);

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for the erection of 30 no. residential dwellings with the associated vehicular and pedestrian access via Burnt Common Lane, car parking, secure cycle storage and landscaping on land off Burnt Common Lane, Ripley.

The Committee received a presentation from Katie Williams, (Specialist) Development Management Applications.  The Committee noted that the site formed part of the Garlick’s Arch site allocation designated under Policy A41 of the Local Plan.  Twelve affordable homes would be delivered as part of the scheme.  A previous application for the site, 19/P/02191, was recently allowed at appeal for the same number of dwellings.  The current scheme had adopted a revised layout and design approach compared to the previous application following extensive pre-application discussions with officers.  The site consisted of a gently arching strip of land that sat on the western edge of the site allocation immediately adjacent to Burnt Common Lane.  The A3 ran to the south-east of the site and the area was characterised by a mix of dwellings that varied both in density and character. 

The southern and eastern boundaries were delineated by mature trees and hedgerows.  The rest of the site consisted predominantly of paddock land currently used for grazing horses.  There would be three individual driveways serving plots 20 to 30 and the main access to the site was proposed to be located opposite Burnt Common Close where there was currently a field access gate.  The existing vehicular access to Oldland’s towards the southern end of the site would be closed off, however the access route serving plots 2 to 4 would follow the same line as the current driveway within the site and the access road would travel north through the middle of the site.  One further separate driveway was proposed to serve the new dwelling on plot 1 at the far southern end.  The trees marked to be retained were located along the western and eastern boundaries. 

In relation to the housing layout, a small two-storey building apartment building and six new houses marked the northern end of the site and to the south the proposal incorporated housing fronting Burnt Common Lane culminating in a small landscaped mead.  The original farmhouse was to be retained.  To the north a hammerhead would be formed to serve nine houses which led to a pedestrian link through to Garlick’s Arch. 

The development proposed a mix of different sized dwellings.  One main area of open space was proposed to the southern end of the site along with a balancing pond at the northern edge.  A linear green corridor would also be provided incorporating a pedestrian link along the western frontage of the site with Burnt Common Lane.  Parking was to be provided by way of individual driveways, integrated garaging, car barns and a parking area to the rear of the apartment building. 

In relation to application 19/P/02191 that was refused by the Committee in April 2020 for the same site, the committee was reminded that this was a material consideration given it had recently been allowed at appeal and could be built out.  The current proposal would result in a much more coherent extension to Garlick’s Arch and a more clearly defined frontage to Burnt Common Lane and reflected the Surrey style.  A density in housing of 21.7 dwellings per hectare had been achieved compared with the dwellings along Burnt Common Lane which had a varied density from 21 to about 15 at the southern end. 

With regard to the proposed street scene elevations, all of the buildings would be two-storey in height with a maximum ridge height of the dwellings and apartment buildings varying from approx. 8.1 to 9.5 metres.  The housing design incorporated a consistent use of simple forms and elevations, using contemporary design features including generous areas of glazing particularly at ground floor level.  A subtle material palette would be used using natural brick that would weather gracefully. 

In conclusion, the application site formed part of the wider allocation of Garlick’s Arch and therefore the principle of residential development on this site was acceptable and in accordance with Policy A41 of the Local Plan.  The design proposed as part of this application was considered to be a vast improvement upon the scheme recently allowed at appeal. This proposal would result in a high-quality design which would create its own identity and character and also be sympathetic to the local character and history including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting.  It would provide positive links with the adjacent Garlick’s Arch site and represented a well-designed scheme in a sustainable location which would provide a net increase of 30 dwellings contributing to the Council’s identified housing need.  The proposal would not have a detrimental impact on highway safety, neighbouring amenity nor have an adverse impact in terms of flood risk.  The development would achieve a 20% carbon emission reduction, introduce a site waste management plan, electric vehicle charging points and cycle storage as well as ecological enhancements secured through the S106 SANG and SAMM contributions. 

In response to comments made by the public speakers, Dan Ledger, Development Management Applications Lead, confirmed that mitigation measures for the Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area were sought as part of the S106 Agreement.  In addition, the report recommendation had omitted the open space requirements, however the report itself did refer to it.  The Committee were therefore assured that open space contributions were being sought as part of the S106. 

The Committee discussed the application and agreed that the current scheme represented a considerable improvement upon the previously refused proposal now allowed at appeal.  The contributions secured were also significant and would assist the infrastructural improvements by way of new bus shelters, education contributions, additional floorspace for a GP practice as well as off site ecological enhancements.  It was confirmed that the chimneys proposed on the dwellings would be used for extraction.  Paul Fineberg, Principal Urban Design Officer was also invited to comment on the improvements made to the current application.  The Committee noted that the present scheme was significantly better conceived than the appeal scheme which had no place-making qualities and was a negative design originally.  The scheme was presented in three significant ways, apartments, small houses to face Burnt Common and a garden suburb. 

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 the application, the Committee

RESOLVED to approve application 20/P/01736 subject:

(i)            That a S106 Agreement be entered into to secure the provision of:

·         SANG and SAMM Contributions and Open Space contributions in

 accordance with the formula of the updated tariff;

·         £28,000 for implementation of 2 bus shelters and their foundations within

 the vicinity of the site;

·         Education contributions as specified by Surrey County Council

·         Healthcare - contribution towards additional clinical floorspace for a GP

practice within the local area

·         Offsite Ecological Enhancements in accordance with the submitted

 Ecological Management Plan

If the terms of the S106 or wording of the planning conditions are significantly

amended as part of ongoing S106 or planning condition(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

Head of Place. The preliminary view is that the application should be granted

subject to conditions.