Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee
Wednesday, 22nd May, 2019 7.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Millmead House, Millmead, Guildford, Surrey GU2 4BB. View directions

Contact: Sophie Butcher, Committee Officer. Tel: 01483 444056  Email: sophie.butcher@guildford.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

PL1

Apologies for absence and notification of substitute members

Minutes:

Apologies were received from the following Councillors; David Bilbé, Colin Cross, Jan Harwood, Marsha Moseley and Bob McShee.  Councillors Jo Randall, Deborah Seabrook, Graham Eyre and Tim Anderson attended as substitutes for Councillors David Bilbé, Colin Cross, Marsha Moseley and Bob McShee respectively.

PL2

Local code of conduct - disclosable pecuniary interests

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

 

If that DPI has not been registered, you must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

 

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

 

Minutes:

There were no disclosures of interest.

PL3

Minutes pdf icon PDF 217 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 April 2019 as attached at Item 3. A copy of the minutes will be placed on the dais prior to the meeting.

Minutes:

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 24 April 2019 were approved and signed by the Chairman.  

PL4

Announcements

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee.

Minutes:

The Committee noted the procedures for determining planning applications. 

 

The Committee were advised that ordinarily councillors had the opportunity to recommend upfront site visits to take place the day prior to the Planning Committee.  Given the committee members were only recently appointed, they would be able to ask for up-front site visits at this meeting.  If any site visits were agreed by the Committee, these would normally be held on the Tuesday prior to the next Planning Committee meeting which will be on Tuesday 18 June and normally start at 9:30am/10am.  The Committee Officer, Sophie Butcher would circulate an invite as appropriate. 

PL5

18/P/01771 - 15 Hillier Road, Guildford, GU1 2JG pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

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

 

·         Ms Fazia Cater (to object)

·         Ms Amanda Mullarkey (to object) (Cranley Road Area Residents Association) (CRARA) and;

·         Mr Matt Hill (in support) (Planning Agent)

 

The Committee considered the above mentioned application for variation of condition 1 (hours of use) of planning application 05/P/01374, approved on 24/08/2005, to amend the operating hours of the recreational area and bring them in line with the operating hours of Tormead School. 

 

The Committee was informed that the site was located within the urban area and comprised a residential property 15 Hillier Road and an area to the rear, which was formerly part of the garden of 15 Hillier Road.  The site was now used as a recreational area in association with Tormead School.  The application sought to extend the hours of operation on this land from 7:45am to 6:30pm Monday to Friday inclusive during term time only so that better use could be made of the recreational area prior to lessons in the morning and extra-curricular activities in the afternoon prior to the school closing in the early evening.  Concern was raised by planning officers to the proposed extension of the hours of use of the land by one hour and fifty minutes in the morning and three hours in the afternoon due to the impact on neighbouring amenity from noise and disturbance.  However, no objection was raised to reducing these hours to 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday inclusive during term time only.  The applicant had agreed to reduce these hours and condition 1 as recommended on page 12 of the agenda would secure these reduced hours.  No external lighting was proposed in this area and no hard surfacing.  The use of the land within the winter months was also likely to be less intensive than in the summer months.  It was the planning officer’s view that the extended hours of this part of the site may also help reduce traffic in the immediate area by spreading out school pick up times over a longer period of time. 

 

With the agreement of the Chairman, Councillor John Redpath was permitted to speak on the application, in his capacity as ward councillor, for three minutes. 

 

The Committee considered the application and noted concerns that the conditions applied in 2005 to the school’s application to amend the operating hours of the recreational area had not been adhered to, specifically in relation to the boundary treatment that was meant to be retained in perpetuity.  Fencing had never been erected between the school and the boundary with no.13 Hillier Road.  Additional tree planting was also meant to have been put in place but was not implemented.  

 

The Planning Development Officer confirmed that he would raise this issue with the Enforcement team to look into further regarding the alleged schools lack of compliance with the 2005 conditions. 

 

In relation to the current application, the Committee was advised that condition  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL5

PL6

18/P/01950 - Land to east of White Lane and West of Chestnut Lodge, Drovers Way, Ash Green, Guildford, GU12 6HY pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

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

 

·         Mr Jonathan Henderson (to object);

·         Ms Gill Squibb (secretary) (Ash Green Residents Association) (to object) and;

·         Mr Kieran Wheeler (Savills) (Planning Agent)

 

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for erection of 59 residential dwellings with associated access, parking, landscaping and infrastructure. (Amended plans received 13.03.2019 and signalisation of Old Railway Bridge). 

 

The Committee was informed that the application site was allocated in the new Local Plan for 62 homes.  The Inspector’s report on the examination of the Local Plan described this among some other site allocations in Ash as acceptable, clearly defined and a suitable site for housing.  Therefore, it was the planning officer’s view that the principle of residential development on this site was acceptable.  The site proposed did not include a small pocket of land, which was why the scheme was for 59 units and not for the allocated 62 units.  The area was characterised by a loose knit residential development around the boundaries.  The site included a number of trees, which had been protected by Tree Preservation Orders as well as ancient woodland to the south, which was also protected by a Tree Preservation Order. 

 

Vehicular access would be provided from White Lane and pedestrian access to the east onto Drovers Way.  The site would also contain open space for new planting.  The 15-metre buffer required to the ancient woodland to the south would be retained as well as existing trees, apart from the removal of trees for the access.  There would also be additional structural and boundary landscaping to provide a transition from the rural area to the more urban context of the site. 

 

The development proposed to offer 40% affordable housing and was in compliance with Local Plan Policy H1, and was guided by the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), as detailed on the supplementary late sheets. 

 

A mixed palette of materials and architectural detailing on the elevations would help break up the buildings.  The works would be required to be carried out as part of the development as a S278 works and secured by a Grampian condition.  There would be signalisation installed over the bridge of the former railway for highway safety reasons.  Foreman Road, which lead to the north and from the site up to Ash Railway Station, would have footway widening works due to the increased pedestrian movements going towards the station.  The S106 Agreement would provide a proportionate contribution to other pedestrian cyclist connections in the area as well as improving Ash level crossing. 

 

Lastly the Committee was informed of the change to conditions 2, 18, 19, 24, 29 and informative 3 as detailed in the supplementary late sheets.  In compliance with the Local Plan, planning officers had required that six of the units on the site were accessible and adaptable dwellings as well as the provision of one wheelchair accessible unit.

 

The Chairman permitted Councillor Paul Abbey to speak  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL6

PL7

19/P/00362 - Holy Trinity Parish Office, 5 Trinity Churchyard, Guildford, GU1 3RR pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

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

 

·         Mr Stephen Marriott (in support) and;

·         Rev Canon Robert Cotton (in support)

 

The Committee considered the above-mentioned retrospective application for replacement of three windows on the ground floor of the west elevation of the Trinity Centre.

 

The Planning Officer informed the Committee that the application sought retrospective permission for the unauthorised replacement of three windows in the western elevation of the ground floor of the Trinity Centre.  The site was located within the Guildford Town Centre Conservation Area and was in an area of High Archaeological Potential.  An Article 4 Direction removed permitted development rights including the right to replace windows without consent.  The application site was also a locally listed building located within the setting of a number of listed buildings including the Church of Holy Trinity, which was a Grade I listed building and other Grade II listed buildings. 

 

The Guildford Borough Council Design and Conservation Team Leader informed the Committee that the Church Centre was a locally listed building of early 20th century origin.  The Parish Rooms were built for Holy Trinity Church, opened in 1909 and was characterised by red brickwork, stone dressing and slate roof, which was typical of a public building of this era.  The building’s significance lay predominantly in its historic and aesthetic values and the large distinctive windows were an essential part of this.  The original windows were multi-paned set in a timber frame with heavy moulded timber surrounds.  A number of the original panes had been replaced with metal inserts but the chunky timber frames were still existing.  The building also lay in close proximity to a number of other listed buildings including the Holy Trinity Church, which was Grade I, and the churchyard.  All of the historic buildings needed to be regarded as a group.  The new windows installed had a powder coated aluminium with thinner and flatter frames.  They also had a different means of opening so that the casements sat proud of the frame.  In addition, glazing bars had been stuck on and therefore failed to replicate the original.  There was now a mismatch between the original detailed design and the windows that had been installed.  The Committee was referred to Historic England’s guidance note, which stated that the loss of traditional windows from our older buildings posed one of the major threats to our heritage.  It was the Design and Conservation Team Leader’s view that the newly installed windows could not be supported in terms of their design and detailing due to the impact the change in their appearance would have on the character and appearance both on this building but also the setting of the adjacent graded heritage assets.    The new windows detracted from and were harmful to the character and appearance of the locally listed building and the setting of the Grade I Listed church in the Conservation Area. 

 

The Chairman permitted  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL7

PL8

18/P/02068 - 8 Meadow Road, Guildford, GU4 7LW pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the above-mentioned application for proposed conversion and extension of existing residential outbuilding to provide an independent residential two-storey dwelling.

 

The Committee was informed that the application proposed to provide a new access following the subdivision of plots, which was recommended for approval subject to conditions and a legal agreement to secure against the harm caused by the proposal on the integrity of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area.  The site was located within the urban area of Guildford and surrounded by residential properties.  Extant permission existed for a two-storey dwelling following demolition of the existing building had been approved at appeal.  The site area had been reduced which had included part of no.7 Meadow Road and no longer formed part of the application site.  No windows were proposed on the rear and side elevations so to protect neighbouring amenity.  Planning officers considered that the overall scale and appearance of the proposal would not cause harm to the character of the site and surrounding area.  There would be no unacceptable harm to neighbouring amenity or the amenity of future occupants.  No concerns had been raised with regard to Highway Safety and Parking and on balance the proposed dwelling was recommended for approval. 

 

The Chairman permitted Councillor Ted Mayne to speak in his capacity as ward councillor for three minutes.

 

The Committee noted that the Neighbourhood Plan for Burpham had been approved after the original planning permission was granted at appeal.  Given the concerns raised by neighbouring residents in relation to the scheme the Committee agreed it would be beneficial to attend a site visit to assess its potential impact upon neighbouring amenities, sewage, highway safety and loss of green space.

 

The site visit was scheduled for Tuesday 18 June to take place at 9:30am and the application would be considered by the Committee at its next meeting on Wednesday 19 June 2019 from 7pm.

PL9

19/P/00330 - Land adjacent to Northrepps Cottage, Green Lane East, Normandy, GU3 2JL pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the above-mentioned application for proposed construction of two dwellings with integral garages and a new access.

 

The Committee was informed that the application site was located on previously undeveloped land in the Green Belt.  It was the planning officers view that the proposal amounted to limited infilling so would not be inappropriate development.  Whilst it was not in an identified settlement boundary, the site was on the fringe of the village and surrounded by development.  The proposed houses were considered to be small scale and the plots would be comparable with the larger plots on the fringe locations.  The Committee also noted the additional representations received as detailed on the supplementary late sheets.

 

The Committee discussed the application and considered its merits.  The Committee considered the fact that it was the planning officer’s view that the development was located within the village and regarded as limited infilling.  The Committee noted that the Parish Council disagreed with this interpretation and contested the fact the site fell within the village.  Green Lane East was also very close to the site of a Roman temple and therefore the Committee noted whether further assessment should be undertaken of the site first prior to development.  The Committee considered that this was not necessary and that on balance the site was suitable for the proposed dwellings.  It would be located on scrubland and the properties were of an equal size to neighbouring properties. 

 

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

 

RESOLVED to approve application 19/P/00330 and agreed:

 

i)              That a Section 106 Agreement be entered into to secure:

 

·                       A SANGS contribution and an Access Management and Monitoring Contributions in accordance with the adopted tariff of the SPA Avoidance Strategy to mitigate against the impact on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area.

 

ii)             That upon completion of (i) above, the application be determined by the Director of Planning and Regeneration.  The preliminary view is that the application should be granted subject to conditions.

 

PL10

19/P/00396 - Land at junction of Kings Road and Chinthurst Lane, Shalford, GU4 pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the above-mentioned application for erection of a 10-metre tall swift tower.

 

The Committee was informed that the proposed swift tower would be located on the corner junction by the cricket ground this restructure is in the Green Belt and is it would comprise an engineering operation and preserves the openness of the Green Belt it was not considered by the planning officers to be an inappropriate development.  The height of the structure above ground level would be 10 metres and there would be accommodation in the tower for nesting swifts.  The structure would comprise a steel pole with nesting area for swifts in the tower.  It would also act as a functional piece of public art. 

 

The Committee discussed the application and agreed that it would be a positive contribution to the landscape that would provide a much needed home for swifts. The Committee commended the work undertaken by the Arts Officer to get this project in place and welcomed its construction.

 

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

 

RESOLVED to approve application 19/P/00396 subject to the conditions and reasons as detailed in the report.

PL11

Planning appeal decisions pdf icon PDF 6 KB

Committee members are asked to note the details of Appeal Decisions as attached at Item 6.

Minutes:

The Committee noted that a summary of the appeals would be provided at the next meeting of the Planning Committee on 19 June 2019.