Agenda item

The Committee considered the above-mentioned application for change of use of the site to 45.9 hectares of land to publicly accessible open space and Nature Reserve to facilitate a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG).

 

The Committee received a presentation from Kelly Jethwa, Specialist Development Management (Majors). The Committee noted that the change of use would allow for the land to be used as a SANG which was mitigated in accordance with the Thames Basin Heaths Avoidance Strategy (TBHSPA) adopted by the Council.  Members were reminded that the SANG was not a land use of itself, the application was to look at the material change of use so that it could become publicly accessible land.  If the land became a SANG, its proximity to the residential development proposed at Weyside Urban Village to the south would provide valuable mitigation for that development as well as other residential development that would meet the Council’s housing needs. 

 

The site was referenced in Appendix 6 of the Local Plan as part of the Infrastructure Schedule.  It is located in the Green Belt and would be appropriate development as it complied with paragraph 150, Part E of the NPPF which allowed for change of use for outdoor recreation.  The proposed car park would be an engineering operation as it would preserve the openness of the Green Belt being on brownfield land or near existing development at the farmstead.  The site would also have biodiversity value added to it and would continue to act as a home for protected species. 

 

The Council and Natural England had worked with the applicant on refining and improving the SANG concept design to ensure that the site would provide a suitable environment.  As a result, Natural England had no objection to the proposals.  The constraints of the site needed to be taken into consideration, which included the provision of crossing points, the distance of footpaths to trees, new footpaths which would provide year-round access and odour control from the new sewage treatment works.  Taking these constraints into consideration, it was believed that the site would be able to deliver a SANG of 27.9 hectares.  Conditions were recommended in relation to the final design and SANG management plan as well as additional screening.  Land to the north of Clay Lane would require a safe crossing point and therefore at this time land would only be used as a nature reserve until a safe pedestrian access across Clay Lane could be provided.  Most of the site would have noise levels that were within acceptable levels.  The parts of the site where noise levels would be exceeded included areas by Clay Lane and by the A3 and would not be used as SANG land.  The site is also located within a flood zone, however flood mitigation measures were proposed and formed part of the management plan.  The applicant had also provided a possible circular SANG walking route from Burpham Court and the proposed car park with a secondary loop also provided.

 

A range of habitats existed on the site including grasslands, river corridor, ditches, hedges, and woodland edge.  There was also the potential to include additional habitat enhancements which would also provide and secure biodiversity net gain such as hedgerow enhancements, shallow pools, log, and brush piles to extend the reed bed and bird and bat boxes.  The most significant trees would be retained and where trees were removed there would be new planting, the details of which secured by condition 6.  The site would need a car park and the illustrative plans proposed 32 spaces with suitable access.   

 

The proposed site contained a Grade II listed building, Burpham Court Farm Cottages which provides a good example of early 17^th century domestic architecture and formed part of the legible historic courtyard of the farmstead.  Less than substantial harm would be caused to the setting of the Farm Cottages and had been verified by the Council’s Conservation Officer who when balancing the harm caused to the heritage assets and its setting against the public benefits concluded that given the car park would be sited on previously developed land its location would have a lesser impact on habitats and the benefits would outweigh the setting of the identified heritage asset in this case.  Members were also reminded that several alternative sites were looked at for the car park and this was felt to be the best one given the other constraints that existed.  The application was therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

 

The Chairman permitted the Ward Councillor for Burpham, Councillor George Potter to speak for an extended period of time of five minutes.  He noted concerns raised regarding the Flood Risk Assessment and its robustness having been questioned by the National Trust in earlier versions of the application such as getting the height of the riverbanks incorrect.  The site was in a floodplain and any errors in Flood Risk Assessment would materially affect the suitability of parts of the site for SANG usage.  In terms of car parking, one parking space per hectare should be provided and according to Waterway’s guidance an additional 10 parking spaces should be provided for canoe users to access water.  In the report it was stated that only 0.75 hectares was needed but condition 5 only provides 0.7 spaces per hectare.  Natural England stated that you needed 38 spaces for the new SANG yet only 32 spaces had been recommended as part of condition 5.  You would therefore have a shortfall of 16 spaces.  This would also provide an extension to the existing Burpham Nature Reserve with the existing access point at Bower’s Lane serving as one of the access points to the new SANG.  The existing nature reserve did not have 1 parking space per hectare provided, so if the new SANG did not accommodate this unmet need, we would see more parking at Bower’s Lane which was already at capacity and also at Clay Lane.  No parking spaces had been provided on the urban side of the new SANG meaning that the catchment area would be much bigger than for the residents of Weyside and many of the people using the SANG would come by car.  He raised further concerns that to approve a change of usage the new use was meant to be viable and sustainable which cannot be the case if concerns remained over the flood risk, parking, and access.  Parking concerns had been raised by County Highways, GBC Parks and Countryside and GBC’s specialist landscape advisers. 

 

He raised concerns that if the application was approved that additional conditions should be applied so to ensure that parking provision took account of the unmet need for visiting nature reserves and make provision for other users of the SANG such as canoe users.  Condition 5 should be varied which went beyond the reduction agreed by Natural England and failed to take account of the unmet need of Burpham Nature Reserve.  Assurance was needed also that the Flood Risk Assessment would be properly tested and evaluated.  Any changes made to the second application in terms of the recommendation and changes to conditions also needed to be applied to this application.  Insufficient parking provision would negatively affect the residents of Jacob’s Well and Clay Lane. 

 

The Head of Place, Dan Ledger confirmed that in respect of concerns raised regarding flood risk this issue had already been addressed on pages 51 and 52 of the agenda.  This set out the flood risk compatibility of the use being provided, and the measures being put in place.  Again, parking had been covered in the report, and in terms of working out the parking provision for the site, whilst the site area was of a significant size, the amount of it that was put towards the SANG was less.  The purpose of the SANG was to serve the new development and not to mitigate other impacts that were already in existence.  One of the intentions of the location so it was close to Weyside was so that it was accessible by foot thereby reducing reliance upon vehicle movements and car parking.  The final point in relation to the scheme of delegation, it had been mentioned that we should make the same updates in relation to the following application 20/P/02155.  This was a matter for members, the intention was to keep the recommendation as simple as possible, but it should be straightforward to implement if desired.

 

The Committee discussed the application and noted that clarification was requested on page 51 of the agenda regarding flood risk and paragraph E in relation to appropriate flood warning and evacuation plans.  How would the SANG work in practice given the current flood problems?

 

The Committee sympathised with the concerns raised regarding parking and whether that issue should be re-visited by the Review Board?  In relation to the timescale for the SANG, it was understood that the SANG had to be operational before any property was first occupied.  There was also a proposal in the agenda that Tyting Farm might be a suitable fallback position for a SANG and whether that was viable?

 

The Head of Place, Dan Ledger confirmed that it had previously been discussed at Committee about the difference between planning applications for land use and the operation of the land as a SANG.  A planning permission for residential development would include S106 requirements regarding the operation of a SANG. This would set the triggers in place for standards to be met and safety factors were always integral to this.  In terms of Tyting Farm, it was not strictly relevant to this application, however just for clarity, it’s set out as an alternative due to the crossing requirements for the northern part of the SANG.  Tyting Farm was set within the right catchment area but was further away and could be used if needed.  Operational matters to do with the SANG were generally controlled through the S106 on residential developments.  Natural England had to be content on each of those applications that the SANG provision was adequate.  So even if permission was granted for land intended to be a SANG, at the point of granting permission or intending to grant permission for those other applications, Natural England still had to be content that what was on the ground was acceptable. 

 

The Senior Planning Officer – Major Applications, Andrew Lainton further confirmed that the SANG would not be needed unless after 2027 there was no crossing north of Clay Lane.  Effectively, the council had 5-6 years to design, consult and build a pedestrian crossing which could be reasonably achieved.  A flow of housing would come forward in phases in Weyside to satisfy the condition.  There had to be sufficient SANG at the point that phase came forward to meet the Natural England test.  It was possible for Burpham Court Farm to be built in phases, and the more SANG you build the more housing that relied on that SANG could be built. 

 

The Committee noted a query raised regarding sustainable drainage systems and whether further information could be provided by officers in that regard. 

 

The Committee also noted a query in relation to it being asked to approve a change of use rather than for this specifically to be a SANG.  The S106 requirements for any residential development was hoped would give us some guidance or control over what was happening on the SANG whilst also assuming that we were talking about reserved matters for residential development on the Weyside Urban Village.  The Committee was also in agreement with the proposal put forward by the Ward Councillor for Burpham, George Potter that the formal recommendation was changed to be the same as that for Weyside Urban Village and that any necessary changes were made in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning Committee. 

 

The Senior Planning Officer – Major Applications, Andrew Lainton referred members to page 63 of the agenda where the key condition on the management plan was detailed.  Natural England had to agree the SUDs and included a large number of issues which had also been agreed with the Council’s Parks and Ecology Services.  The condition did not mention SUDs like it did for a housing development given that SUD’s were designed to recreate the natural drainage you might find on a riverside or park, so strictly speaking SUDs was not the term which should be used, it would rather be drainage.  The condition at point 23 could therefore be updated to include details of drainage.   

 

A motion was moved and seconded which was carried so that the formal recommendation for this application was updated to reflect the same wording as that used for application 20/P/02155:

 

RECORDED VOTE LIST
	COUNCILLOR	FOR	AGAINST	ABSTAIN
1	Paul Spooner	X
2	Liz Hogger	X
3	Fiona White	X
4	Maddy Redpath	X
5	Pauline Searle	X
6	Ruth Brothwell	X
7	Angela Gunning	X
8	Tim Anderson	X
9	Tony Rooth	X
10	Jon Askew	X
11	Angela Goodwin	X
12	Chris Blow	X
13	Marsha Moseley	X
14	Ramsey Nagaty	X
15	David Bilbe	X
	TOTALS	15	0	0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

RECORDED VOTE LIST
	COUNCILLOR	FOR	AGAINST	ABSTAIN
1	Ruth Brothwell	X
2	Maddy Redpath	X
3	Chris Blow	X
4	Liz Hogger	X
5	Angela Gunning	X
6	Paul Spooner	X
7	Tim Anderson	X
8	Fiona White	X
9	Tony Rooth	X
10	David Bilbe	X
11	Ramsey Nagaty	X
12	Pauline Searle	X
13	Marsha Moseley	X
14	Jon Askew	X
15	Angela Goodwin	X
	TOTALS	15	0	0

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 1  Planning Obligation Head of Terms

 

·           Securing Management of the SANG and Biodiversity Exclusion Zones in Perpetuity, including step-in-rights.

·           Improvements to the Bowers Lane Bridge, with public access granted by confirmatory deed.

·           Construction of a controlled pedestrian crossing across Clay Lane, and costs of any associated TRO to adjust extent of Jacobs Well speed limit X

·           Improvement to bell mouth of access to Burpham Court Farm to bring to a Safe Standard.

 

Appendix 2  Planning Conditions and Informatives

 

CONDITIONS:

 

1.         Time limit – Full Application

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.         Drawing no.s

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following list of approved plans and documents, except where other conditions require detailed and /or revised drawings on specific matters.

 

                                  

Plan No	Date Issued /last revision	Title
42287/3147/001	17th Dec 2020	Site Location Plan
42287/3147/03	17th Dec 2020	Transport Note including Indicative Site Access and Parking Layout Drawings
42287/3147/03	17th Dec 2020	Landscape Details
20275-MA-RP-D-TS01	17th Dec 2020	Arboricultural Statement
201209-1.0-WUVSANG-AS-CH	17th Dec 2020	Ecological Appraisal and Shadow Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening Statement
42287/3163	17th Dec 2020	Flood Risk Assessment
42287/4017	17th Dec 2020	Noise Assessment
42287/3167	17th Dec 2020	Sustainability Statement
20_P_02173	22 Sep 2021	SANG Illustrative Design

 

 

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approval and to ensure the quality of development indicated on the approved plans and documents is achieved in practice.

 

3.         Exclusion of Certain Areas as SANG (pre-commencement condition)

The change of use to Public Open Space (intended for SANG purposes) does not apply to the following areas:

a)    All areas within the site Boundary north of Clay Lane, unless and until the pedestrian crossing required by the planning obligation linking footpaths north and south of Clay Lane is approved by the planning authority and highways authority and so implemented.:

b)    All areas defined as biological exclusion areas in the approved landscape management plan;

c)    All areas within the A3 60Dba noise contour;

d)    All areas shown on the flood management plan as being within flood zone 3 and where safe pedestrian access cannot be provided.

Prior to commencement of development and coming into use as a SANG clear plans shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority showing each of these 4 areas, and the area of the residual SANG area.

Reason: To ensure the Natural England minimum standards for SANGS are met.

 

4.         Public Use in Perpetuity

Following the of all the capital works as shown on the approved plans under condition 2 the site shall be made available for public use in perpetuity, other that the excluded areas listed in condition 3.

 

Reason To ensure the site can qualify as a SANG

 

5.         SANG Car Park (pre-commencement condition)

Prior to commencement of development and coming into use as a SANG plans for a car park and access arrangements within the red line boundary for at least 1 car parking space for every 0.7ha of approved SANG, plus other spaces for Non SANG activities, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority and so implemented.  This shall include screening landscaping details and include a minimum of two DDA wide bays.

In addition, the Car Park shall not be opened for public access until the planning obligation for improvement to the bellmouth has been implemented.

Reason: To ensure the Natural England minimum standards for SANGS are met.

 

6.         SANG and Biodiversity Management Plan (pre-commencement condition)

Prior to commencement of development hereby permitted a SANG and landscape and ecological management plan (SLEMP), including long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The management plan shall be carried out and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details.

All works in the approved SLEMP, including hard and soft landscaping, shall be implemented before any approved parts of the plan suitable for SANG are brought into use of as public open space.

The plan shall also include the additional elements listed below:

                 i.       aims and objectives of the management plan

                ii.       description of the ecological features of the site to be managed and habitat condition to be achieved, including tree planting measures

               iii.       a plan which illustrates which areas have been included for Biodiversity Net Gain for other schemes;

              iv.       Description of measures to encourage and manage public access, including signage, walkways, bird hides, cycleways, car parks, and picnic areas

               v.       Ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management

              vi.       Areas where public access is restricted (biodiversity exclusion areas)

             vii.       details of maintenance regimes for each habitat type supported by a detailed map. coppicing/pollarding should aim to create approximately 60% sun and 40% shade over the watercourse.

            viii.       timings of maintenance activities and ecological considerations (e.g. avoiding bird nesting season when carrying out vegetation      clearance/tree works) details of how public access will be restricted and disturbance minimised to the buffer zone

              ix.       landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 10 years, including timings, work programmes, replacements etc

               x.       monitoring for and control of non-native invasive species, including Himalayan Balsam which has been recorded on site

              xi.       details of new/restored Hedgerow planting and enhancement of hedgerows e.g. through in-fill or double/new planting.

             xii.       management of existing woodland via selective thinning and planting of new woodland.

            xiii.       diversification of some grassland areas e.g. using meadow management techniques.

            xiv.       management of existing ponds to increase the diversity of vegetation.

             xv.       creating buffer areas along the riverbanks where access is prevented.

            xvi.       the creation of larger shallow pools or scrapes in areas toward the centre of the Site.

           xvii.       creation of log and brash piles to provide refuge for small fauna.

          xviii.       expansion of reedbed habitat in the south of the Site.

            xix.       the installation of new bird and bat boxes

             xx.       details of Eel passes

            xxi.       details of proposals to increase wetland areas, wet woodland and wildflower meadows

           xxii.       details of measures to encourage otter habitat

          xxiii.       details of on-going ecological survey work to further shape the Management Plan details of management responsibilities

         xxiv.       all native planting is to be of local provenance.

           xxv.       details of the legal and funding mechanism(s) by which long term implementation of the plan shall be secured by the developer with the management body responsible for its delivery

         xxvi.       A circular walk of minimum length of 2.3 km

        xxvii.       The LEMP shall be implement in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained.

       xxviii.       Details of drainage.

Reason: to ensure the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat and secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site.

7.         Heritage Management Plan (pre-commencement condition)

Prior to the commencement of development a heritage management plan shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority showing ho heritage assets and archaeological features (particularly surviving and remnant sections of the ‘Flowing River’), are maintained and not adversely impacted by proposed planting, relandscaping and construction of the walkways.; and the scheme shall be implemented in line with the approved plan.

Reason:  to protect heritage assets. This is required to be a pre-commencement condition to ensure that this issue is fully considered in drawing up detailed management proposals.

8.         Tree protection measures (pre-commencement meeting)

No development shall other than in accordance with finalised Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) (detailing all aspects of construction and staging of works relating to the full application) and the finalised Tree Protection Plan (TPP), submitted with and approved as part of this planning application, including both  trees affected by the full application works, and needing to be protected where part of future phases, in accordance with British Standard 5837:2012.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed method statement and no equipment, machinery or materials shall be brought onto the site for the purposes of the development until fencing has been erected in accordance with the Tree Protection Plan. Within any area fenced in accordance with this condition, nothing shall be stored, placed or disposed of above or below ground, the ground level shall not be altered, no excavations shall be made, nor shall any fires be lit. The fencing shall be maintained in accordance with the approved details, until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been moved from the site.

 

Reason: To protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality and reduce the risk to protected and retained trees. This is required to be a pre-commencement condition as details relating to the protection of trees during and after construction goes to the heart of the permission.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.         Tree Protection Meeting (pre-commencement meeting)

 

No development shall commence until a site meeting has taken place with the site manager, the retained consulting arboriculturalist and the LPA and Parks and Countryside Tree Officers.

 

Reason: To protect the trees on site which are to be retained in the interests of the visual amenities of the locality. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the tree protection measures need to be checked prior to the development commencing to ensure they are adequately installed.

 

10.      Ancient Woodland and Veteran Tree Buffer

No development may take place within 15m of any veteran tree or area of ancient woodland identified in the arboricultural statement (20275-MA-RP-D-TS01), other than no-dig development agreed in advance with the local planning authority.

Reason: To protect the nationally protected trees on site which are to be retained in the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

11.      Weyside Buffer Zone scheme

In order to protect the River Wey (and associated biodiversity receptors), an 8m minimum ecological buffer is required between the top of the River Wey riverbank and any development.  There shall be no development within this buffer zone other that that required for access to the River Wey or for the creation of a riverside Walk. 

 

Reason: Land alongside watercourses is particularly valuable for wildlife and it is essential this is protected. Buffer zones to watercourses form a vital part of green infrastructure provision.

 

12.      Restriction of Permitted Development Rights

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 (as amended), no buildings, gates, fences, or any other form of enclosure other than shown on the approved plans or agreed as part of the Landscape and Biodiversity Enhancement and Management Plan shall be constructed or erected on the site.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

13.      Ecological Appraisal

Unless otherwise agreed by the Biodiversity and Landscape Enhancement and Management Plan the development shall be undertake in accordance with the recommendations set out in the submitted Ecological Appraisal as well as the Bat Survey, Breeding Birds Survey, Badger Survey, Dormouse Survey and Great Crested Newt Survey.

Reason: In order to protect the nature conservation and biodiversity value of the site.

 

14.      Landscape Design  (SANG use)

Prior to use of the site as an area of public open pace approved for use as Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG) details of all hard and soft landscaping shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The shall be subsequently implemented in accordance with the approved plan details.

Reason: In order to ensure implementation of the approved landscape details.

15.      No Lighting

No lighting shall be installed on the site unless otherwise agreed and approved in writing by the LPA.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and nature conservation. Any variance would require a separate habitat assessment in terms of protected species such as bats.

16.       Western Wey Bank Exclusion Zone

The exclusion zone for the protection of wintering birds in the centre of the site is to be extended to the western bank of the river, so that it includes the area between the proposed bridge crossings.

Reason: To protect this area from disturbance to wintering birds, reduce operational impacts on managing this area for nature conservation and biodiversity net gain.

.

 

  Informatives

 

1.          This statement is provided in accordance with Article 35(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. Guildford Borough Council seek to take a positive and proactive approach to development proposals. We work with applicants in a positive and proactive manner by:

•     Offering a pre application advice service

•     Where pre-application advice has been sought and that advice has been followed we will advise applicants/agents of any further issues arising during the course of the application

•     Where possible officers will seek minor amendments to overcome issues identified at an early stage in the application process

 

However, Guildford Borough Council will generally not engage in unnecessary negotiation for fundamentally unacceptable proposals or where significant changes to an application is required.

In this case pre-application advice was sought and provided which addressed initial issues, the application has been submitted in accordance with that advice, however, further issues were identified during the consultation stage of the application. Officers have worked with the applicant to overcome these issues.

 

 

2.          Lead Local Flood Authority Informatives:

 

If proposed site works affect an Ordinary Watercourse, Surrey County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority should be contacted to obtain prior written Consent. More details are available on our website.

If proposed works result in infiltration of surface water to ground within a Source Protection Zone the Environment Agency will require proof of surface water treatment to achieve water quality standards.

As part of the submission of information to discharge the surface water drainage planning conditions the Applicant should provide pond liner details and depths in accordance with the manufacture’s recommendations, this should include evidence

          that a hydrogeologist has reviewed the pond liner design to take account of ground conditions.

 

3.          County Highway Authority Informatives:

 

The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway.

The applicant is advised that prior approval must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, or verge to form a vehicle crossover or to install dropped kerbs. Please see www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/road-permits-and-licences/vehiclecrossovers-or-dropped-kerbs 

The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway or any works that may affect a drainage channel/culvert or water course. The applicant is advised that a permit and, potentially, a Section 278 agreement must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway. All works on the highway will require a permit and an application will need to submitted to the County Council's Street Works Team up to 3 months in advance of the intended start date, depending on the scale of the works proposed and the classification of the road. Please see

www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/road-permits-and-licences/the-trafficmanagement-permit-scheme 

 

The applicant is also advised that Consent may be required under Section 23 of the

Land Drainage Act 1991. Please see

www.surreycc.gov.uk/people-and-community/emergency-planningandcommunitysafety/flooding-advice 

The developer is advised that as part of the detailed design of the highway works required by the above condition(s), the County Highway Authority may require necessary accommodation works to street lights, road signs, road markings, highway drainage, surface covers, street trees, highway verges, highway surfaces, surface edge restraints and any other street furniture/equipment.

The Highway Authority has no objection to the proposed development, subject to the above conditions but, if it is the applicant’s intention to offer any of the roadworks included in the application for adoption as maintainable highways, permission under the Town and Country Planning Act should not be construed as approval to the highway engineering details necessary for inclusion in an Agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980. Further details about the post-planning adoption of roads may be obtained from the Transportation Development Planning Division of Surrey County Council.

It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that the electricity supply is sufficient to meet future demands and that any power balancing technology is in place if required. For guidance and further information on charging modes and connector types please refer to: www.beama.org.uk/resourceLibrary/beama-guide-to-electric-vehicleinfrastructure.html 

 

5.          Ecology Informative:

 

Should Bats be identified as present or their roosts, the applicant should contact Natural England to establish if a Protected Species licence is required in order to allow the development to proceed lawfully.

 

 

6.       SANG Informative

 

The proposed site is unlikely to provided mitigation against the impact of residential development on the TBH SPA unless and until a SANG Management Plan, including details and responsibilities of a suitable management body and the long term funding of the sites management, has been agreed with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Natural England.