Agenda item

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

·         Mr Christopher Kelland (to object) and;

·         Mrs Nicky Armstrong (to object)

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for proposed construction of 16 dwellings accessed via Hawthorn Close.

The Committee was informed by the Specialist Development Manager (Majors) John Busher that the proposal was for 16 affordable homes located in the Green Belt.  The dwellings would be arranged as an extension to the existing layout of Hawthorn Close.  The development included six pairs of semi-detached dwellings, two storey maisonettes and four of the properties would have their own private garden.  Parking would be provided adjacent to the dwellings.  The proposed development would also be comprised of a mix of one, two and three-bedroom dwellings which would meet the identified local need in the Normandy parish.  Because all of the 16 dwellings would be affordable the proposal was considered to be a rural exception site in Green Belt terms.  Extant planning permission was already in place for 15 dwellings on the site approved in 2019.  Although this proposal now included one additional dwelling, it would not result in any greater harm to the area.  The properties were fairly modest in size and relatively traditional in their appearance. 

It was the Specialist Development Manager’s view that given the proposal was for 100% affordable housing the scheme was therefore considered to be acceptable under the rural exception policy.  The provision of 16 affordable dwellings would go some way to meeting a locally identified need.  The S106 would secure the tenure and nomination rights of housing in agreement with the Housing Strategy Manager.  The site already had outline planning permission for 15 dwellings which was still extant, and the additional dwelling would add no further harm.  No objections had been received by the statutory consultees and no harm had been identified to be caused to the character of the area or amenity of neighbouring properties. 

In response to points raised by the public speakers, the Specialist Development Manager, confirmed that in relation to the planning history and the previous application, reference had also been made to a previously refused application in 2013 which was for mixed use, market and affordable.  A different test was therefore applied in that case.  This application was for 100% affordable housing and therefore fell within the rural exception test and was therefore judged to be appropriate development in the Green Belt.  In addition, the net loss in biodiversity was outweighed by the provision of affordable housing.  A Grampian condition had also been attached to the permission which would prevent commencement of the development until SANG capacity had become available. 

The Committee considered the application and concerns raised that the site was not allocated in the Local Plan and there were already a number of affordable homes located within the vicinity of the site.  A very narrow single-track lane led to a limited number of houses which already suffered from frequent flooding along Beech Lane and damaged people’s properties and gardens.  Normandy itself suffered from a very shallow water table which was exacerbated by ground surface water run-off from the Hogs Back.  It was also important to maintain biodiversity and the provision of affordable homes should not be the overriding factor in determining to build in Green Belt locations.  Beech Lane was also very busy with traffic and a dangerous junction at which there had been a number of accidents. 

The Committee requested clarification regarding the planning history of the site and its rural exception status as 100% affordable housing was now proposed.  The Development Management Applications Lead, Dan Ledger confirmed that a previous appeal decision related to a decision for a mix of market and affordable homes which was considered to be inappropriate development.  The extant permission was for 100% x15 affordable homes.  Sites in the Green Belt therefore allowed rural exception sites where they were identified to meet local affordable housing needs. 

The Committee also raised concerns regarding whether the houses would be relatively small owing to the need to be affordable.  Who had identified the affordable need and whether that affordability would be retained in perpetuity for the local people who lived in Normandy. 

The Specialist Development Manager confirmed that the affordable identified housing need in Normandy had been established by the housing department.  In terms of what was meant by affordable, affordable rents and reduced prices would be managed by a housing company. 

The Committee also considered that the increase by one dwelling to the already approved extant scheme was fairly tight on the site.  The Committee remained concerned about the risk of flooding and noted conditions 9 and 10 which would assist with the management of surface water drainage.  The Committee wanted to know how those conditions compared with the previously approved scheme?

In relation to concerns regarding road safety with the additional forty residents using Beech Lane, it was noted that Surrey Highways had no concerns regarding the scheme subject to the inclusion of a road safety scheme condition requiring the installation of new signage.  Further clarification was also sought on what date the Housing Assessment Need report was carried out on. 

The Development Management Applications Lead confirmed that Surrey County Council were the lead flood authority for drainage matters.  There were two technical options they proposed to examine once they had a better understanding of the ground conditions.  Condition 9 required those detailed to be submitted to the Council and Condition 10 required a verification report detailing the work to be agreed to be undertaken both before and after the development.  It was not known on what date the Housing Assessment Need report was carried out on however it was also important to note that the housing officer would have reviewed the existing 2020 housing register.

The Committee considered that the rural exception site in the Green Belt was acceptable given the provision of 100% affordable homes which was much needed.  The concerns raised regarding flooding had been adequately addressed through conditions 9 and 10 as well as appropriate road safety mitigation measures put in place by Surrey Highways.  The additional dwelling proposed would not adversely harm the character of the surrounding area or the neighbour’s enjoyment of their amenities.

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/01148:

(i)            Subject to a Section 106 Agreement securing:

·         Provision of 100% affordable housing in accordance with the Council’s approved tenure split

·         Nomination rights of housing in agreement with the Housing and Strategy Manager

·         Provision of SANG mitigation in accordance with the Thames Basin Heaths SPA Avoidance Strategy 2017;

·         A contribution towards SAMM;

·         A contribution towards early years, primary and secondary education

·         A contribution towards open space in accordance with the tariff.

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 Director of Service Delivery.