Agenda item

The application was for a proposed Gypsy/Traveller site (two pitches) comprising the siting of two mobile homes, two touring caravans, the erection of two day rooms, hard standing and landscaping (part-retrospective).

The application would have normally been determined under the Council's Scheme of Delegation, however, it had been called-in by Councillor Rebecca Jennings-Evans on the basis of concerns raised by local residents and potential environmental impact on a Special Protection Area.

Members were advised of the following updates on the application:

“Correction

Section 7.3.14 of the agenda report should refer to a “buffer zone”.

Proposed conditions

The applicant has proposed that in place of “No development shall commence”, the proposed conditions be reworded such that they treat the development as though it were retrospective – i.e. “Within X weeks of the date of this permission”.

The applicant has argued that rewording the conditions as such would enable the development to “commence” in the form of the applicants moving back onto the site, but allowing for no further works until the details are submitted are approved, and argues that this is a sensible approach to take giving consideration to the current accommodation situation for the applicants.

The applicant would however accept the pre-commencement conditions as they are, should these alternatively worded conditions require further consideration by members of the Committee.

Officer comment

The conditions should remain as pre-commencement or pre-occupation as outlined, as due to the site’s location near to major roads and the SPA, issues such as landscaping, contamination and noise levels are fundamental to the acceptability of the scheme, and would therefore be at the heart of any planning permission if granted.

Additional consultation response

The Council’s Arboricultural Officer has raisedno tree or landscape related objections. The Arboricultural Officer has however commented that due to the progressive presence of Oak Processionary Moth within the eastern sector of the Borough, Oaks should not be planted as part of the proposed landscaping and replanting. Scots Pine and Birch are represented within the area and should be primarily considered. Rhododendron ponticum is present throughout the adjacent wooded sectors and presents a pernicious issue with regards to the future of these areas. This should ideally be managed as part of the broader landscape management of the site.

Officer comment

In order to reflect the above comments, Condition 4 (p26) is proposed to be reworded as highlighted below:

Notwithstanding the submitted proposed site plan (Drawing No. J003396 - CD03 Rev A), no development or soft or hard landscaping works shall take place until a further proposed site plan is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  This plan shall include the following:

a) Proposed location and specification of a physical barrier between the application site and the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area 400m buffer zone;

b) Proposed location of any other walls, fences or access features;

c) Precise areas of hard standing to be removed and retained - ensuring that no hard standing is within the above buffer zone;

d) Location and species of all retained and proposed planting. Replacement planting species shall be of native provenance, excluding any Oak species;

e) Details of the measures to be taken to protect existing features during the construction of the development, and;

f) A Landscape Management Plan, including management timescales and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, to include the identified presence of Rhododendron ponticum within the whole site under control of the applicant.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality and to avoid adverse impacts on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, in accordance with Policies CP14 and DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

The following additional condition is proposed, to secure  the implementation and retention of the approved landscaping details:

Additional planning condition:

All hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details within the first planting season following the first occupation of the site.

Any trees or plants, which within a period of five years of commencement of any works in pursuance of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced as soon as practicable with others of similar size and species, following consultation with the Local Planning Authority, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012.

Agenda report

Paragraph 4.3, p18

For clarity, the definition of “gypsies and travellers”, as set out in Annex 1 of the PPTS is as follows:

Persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling showpeople or circus people travelling together as such.

Accordingly, Condition 3 is proposed to be reworded as highlighted below:

The site shall be occupied by no more than two gypsy pitches, each comprising no more than one mobile home, one tourer caravan and one day room. In addition the accommodation hereby approved shall only be occupied by persons meeting the definition of  “gypsies and travellers”, as defined in Annex 1 of Planning Policy for Traveller Sites 2015 (or any planning policy statement replacing or superseding that statement).

Reason:

To ensure the approved  gypsy pitches are retained for their designated purpose  in perpetuity and to protect the countryside and visual amenity of the area and  to accord with Policies CP1, CP2, CP7, DM6 and DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012, the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites.

Paragraph 7.7, p24-25

Condition 5 (p27) is proposed as recommended by Surrey Wildlife Trust (SWT) to provide mitigation and enhancement measures to cover the likely presence of reptiles. This condition can be reworded as highlighted below to clarify that the additional ecological measures required by this condition, once agreed, will have to be implemented, maintained and secured:

No development shall commence until a Reasonable Avoidance Measures Document, written by a suitably qualified ecologist, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, with the agreed mitigation and enhancement measures implemented and then maintained and secured in accordance with the agreed Document. This Document shall include the proposed ecology mitigation and enhancement measures for the likely presence of reptiles.

Reason: To conserve and enhance biodiversity and legally protected species and landscapes, in accordance with Policy CP14 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

An additional planning condition is proposed as follows, to ensure compliance with the mitigation and enhancement measures as recommended in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal:

Additional planning condition:

The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with all the avoidance, mitigation and enhancement actions within Section 5 of the Preliminary Ecology Appraisal (David Archer Associates, November 2020). Any external lighting installed on this development shall comply with the recommendations of the Bat Conservation Trusts' document entitled "Bats and Lighting in the UK - Bats and The Built Environment Series".  

Reason: To conserve and enhance biodiversity and legally protected species in accordance with Policy CP14A of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

The recommended mitigation and enhancement measures include: protection of the woodland edge; replanting of native specimens of local provenance; restriction of light spill towards woodland areas; control of rhododendron, and; installation of bird and bat boxes.

Paragraph 7.8, p25

The SANG contribution would be £19,824.00 and the SAMM contribution would be £1,988.28. The applicant is willing to secure this by means of a Section 106 legal agreement.

Section 10.0 - Recommendation

Accordingly, the recommendation in Section 10 is altered as follows:

GRANT subject to a legal agreement to secure the contributions towards SANG and SAMM, and the following conditions:

[…]

In the event that a satisfactory legal agreement has not been completed by 30 September 2020, or any other period as agreed with the Executive Head of Regulatory, the Executive Head of Regulatory be authorised to REFUSE for the following reason:

1. In the absence of a completed legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the applicant has failed to comply with Policy CP14 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Document 2012; and, Policy NRM6 (Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area) of the South East Plan in relation to the provision of contribution towards Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) and Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) measures, in accordance with the requirements of the Surrey Heath Borough Council's Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance Strategy Supplementary Planning Document 2019.”

The officer recommendation to grant the application was proposed by Councillor Morgan Rise, seconded by Councillor Cliff Betton and put the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that application 19/2074 be granted subject to the conditions in the officer report and updates.

Note 1 

A roll call vote was conducted and the voting in relation to the application was as follows:

Voting in favour of the recommendation to grant the application:

Councillors Graham Alleway, Peter Barnett, Cliff Betton, Colin Dougan, Shaun Garrett, Edward Hawkins, David Lewis, Charlotte Morley, Darryl Ratiram, Morgan Rise, Graham Tapper, Victoria Wheeler, Helen Whitcroft and Valerie White.