Agenda item

The application was for the erection of a residential development of 65 dwellings along with associated estate roads and accesses onto Deepcut Bridge Road, car parking, bin stores and external landscaping following the demolition of all existing buildings.

 

Members were advised of the following updates on the application:

 

“Further clarification

 

Foul and surface water outlets:

 

In 2014, shared private sewers were adopted by the water utilities companies – in this case Thames Water.  There is no policy for or against raised foul sewers and it would be a matter for Thames Water to provide an alternative sewer provision in this location, if it were required.  It is understood that the landowner (and therefore applicant) has the right to use this foul sewer. 

 

The Local Lead Flood Authority (Surrey County Council) [LLFA] has advised regarding the drainage and flood risk matters (see below).   Thames Water do not normally comment on planning applications and have not done so in this case.  They are, however, informed of all applications and will comment where they consider it is required.  Any connections to the Thames Water drainage system would be a matter for that organisation. 

 

In terms of the surface water outlet into the Basingstoke Canal, the applicant has advised that an outflow to the canal currently exists and has been used for over 20 years and, as such, a drainage easement exists and has been acquired by prescription.

 

Other matters:

 

It is not considered that enhancements to the canal towpath for the length of the towpath, or in part, would meet the tests for imposing conditions or other limitations on a development of this scale.  It is understood that enhancements to the canal network are to be provided by the much larger Deepcut (Mindenhurst) development. 

The applicant has indicated that the development will be phased, constructing from east to west across the site.  As such, amendments to Conditions 5 and 26 have been requested.

 

 

Further Consultee Comments

 

·         The Local Lead Flood Authority has raised no objections to the proposal subject to conditions and the following advice:

 

“Discussions are ongoing with the applicant and the Canal Trust [the Basingstoke Canal Authority] in relation to the existing historic unconsented outflow into the canal.  At this time, the applicant has demonstrated that on-site management of surface water is proposed in accordance with national guidance.  Approval to connect to the canal has not yet been given and legal issues will need to be resolved should planning permission be granted and prior to the agreement of details pursuant to condition.”

 [See Amended proposed Conditions 30 and 31, below]. 

 

·         The Basingstoke Canal Authority has advised that further evidence regarding the proscriptive rights to discharge surface water into the Canal is needed.  They note that this is a land property matter.

 

·         The County Archaeological Officer has confirmed that following the receipt of further details, including the recording of a Nissan hut on the site, the previously requested condition [proposed Condition 32] is now not required.

 

·         Highways England has withdrawn their request for a construction and environment management plan condition.  The condition, as requested separately by the County Highway Authority, [proposed Condition 14] remains as per the officer report.

 

·         The Housing Services Manager raises no objection to the proposal.

 

Changes to RECOMMENDATION

 

DELETE Condition 32

 

AMENDED conditions (amendments in bold):

 

Condition 2

 

The proposed development shall be built in accordance with the following approved plans:1417/100 Rev C and 1417/100-1 Rev C received on 29 April 2022; HT-Hi-Ep-x3-01, HT-Hi-Ep-x3-02, HT-Hi-01 Rev A, HT-Hi-02 Rev A, HT-Hi-Ep-01, HT-Hi-Ep-02, HT-Ep-Hi-x2-01, HT-Ep-Hi-x2-02, HT-Cr-01 Rev A, HT-Cr-02 Rev A, HT-Ok-01 Rev B, HT-Ok-02 Rev A, HT-Ok-03, HT-Ok-04, HT-Ok-05, HT-Go-01 Rev A, HT-Go-01, HT-Go-02 Rev A, HT-Lo-01 Rev A, HT-Lo-02 Rev A, HT-Lo-03, HT-Lo-04, HT-Cb-01 Rev A, HT-Cb-02 Rev A, HT-Cb-03 Rev A, HT-Ma-01 Rev A, HT-Ma-02 Rev A, HT-Ma-03 Rev A, HT-Ma-04 Rev A, HT-As-01, HT-As-02, HT-La-01 Rev A, HT-La-02 Rev A, HT-Wi-Pe-x2-Wi-01 Rev A, HT-Wi-Pe-x2-Wi-02, HT-We-Pe-x2-Wi-03, HT-Wi-Pe-x2-Wi-04 Rev A, HT-Wi-Pe-x3-Ra-01 Rev B, HT-Wi-Pe-x3-Ra-02 Rev A, HT-Wi-Pe-x3-Ra-03 Rev A, HT-Wi-Pe-x3-Ra-04 Rev B, HT-Pe-x2-01 Rev B, HT-Pe-x2-02 Rev B, HT-Pe-x3-01 Rev B, HT-Pe-x3-02 Rev B, HT-Pe-x3-03 Rev A, HT-Pe-x3-04 Rev A, HT-Ra-01 Rev A and HT-Ra-02 Rev A received on 6 May 2022, unless the prior written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning and as advised in ID.17a of the Planning Practice Guidance.

 

Condition 5

 

The visitor parking spaces shown on the approved plan 1417/100 Rev C shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles.  The on-plot parking spaces shown on the approved plan 1417/100 Rev C shall be made available for use prior to the occupation of the dwelling to which it relates and shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles. 

 

Reason: To ensure the provision of on-site parking accommodation and to accord with Policies CP11 and DM11 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012.

 

Condition 26

 

Details of the play space and trim trail, as identified on approved Drawing Number 1417/100 Rev C shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.  The approved details shall be provided prior to the occupation of the 20^th dwelling within the approved development and retained in perpetuity.

 

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of future occupiers and to comply with Policy DM16 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012.

 

Condition 30

 

The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of the design of a surface water drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The design must satisfy the SuDS Hierarchy and be compliant with the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS, NPPF and Ministerial Statement on SuDS. The required drainage details shall include:

 

a) Evidence that the proposed final solution will effectively manage the 1 in 30 & 1 in 100 (+40% allowance for climate change) storm events and 10% allowance for urban creep, during all stages of development.  High-level overflows from the proposed infiltration basin(s) should be provided using a discharge rate of 5 litres/sec (total combined), including evidence of a viable surface water outfall. 

 

b) Detailed drainage design drawings and calculations to include: a finalised drainage layout detailing the location of drainage elements, pipe diameters, levels, and long and cross sections of each element including details of any flow restrictions and maintenance/risk reducing features (silt traps, inspection chambers etc).  Confirmation is required of a 1 metre unsaturated zone from the base of any proposed soakaway to the seasonal high groundwater level and confirmation of half-drain times and ground stability in proximity to the canal.

 

c) Details of how the drainage system will be protected during construction and how runoff (including any pollutants) from the development site will be managed before the drainage system is operational.

 

d) Details of drainage management responsibilities and maintenance regimes for the drainage system.

 

e) A plan showing exceedance flows (i.e. during rainfall greater than design events or during blockage) and how property on and off site will be protected from increased flood risk.

 

Reason: To ensure the design meets the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS and the final drainage design does not increase flood risk on or off site and to accord with Policy DM10 of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the NPPF.

 

Condition 31

 

Prior to the first occupation of the development, a verification report carried out by a qualified drainage engineer must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This must demonstrate that the drainage system has been constructed as per the agreed scheme (or detail any minor variations), provide the details of any management company and state the national grid reference of any key drainage elements (surface water attenuation devices/areas, flow restriction devices and outfalls), and confirm any defects have been rectified.

 

Reason: To ensure the drainage system is constructed to the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS.

 

ADDITIONAL conditions

 

(New) Condition 32

 

No gates shall be provided across the main access road, as shown on approved Drawing Number 1417/100 Rev C, unless the prior written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To integrate this development within the wider local area and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

Condition 33

 

Prior to completion or first occupation of the development hereby approved, whichever is the sooner; a woodland management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The management plan should be prepared by a qualified and experienced forestry or arboricultural consultant, the Woodland Management Plan will aim to enhance the ecological value of the woodland within the control of the applicant. Details to be included must cover a period of at least 15-20 years and should include the following elements:

 

a)    A statement of the overall design vision for the woodland and for individual trees retained as part of the development.

b)    Type and frequency of management operations to achieve and sustain canopy, understorey, and ground cover, to remove invasive species and to provide reinstatement including planting where tree loss or vandalism occurs.

c)    Frequency of safety inspections, which should be at least three yearly in areas of high risk, less often in lower risk areas

d)    Confirmation that the tree work is carried out by suitably qualified and insured tree contractors to British Standard 3998 (2010).

e)    Special measures relating to Protected Species or habitats, e.g. intensive operations to avoid March-June nesting season or flowering periods as well as Description and evaluation of ecological features to be managed and created for protected species.

f)     Inspection for pests, vermin and diseases and proposed remedial measures.

g)    Recommendations relating to how trees within the immediate vicinity of properties or within private areas are to be protected, such that these are retained without the loss of their canopy or value as habitat.

h)    Confirmation of cyclical management plan assessments and revisions to evaluate the plan’s success and identification of any proposed actions, including Preparation of a costed work schedule for securing biodiversity enhancements in perpetuity;

i)     Financial provision to ensure long term security for the woodland, including secure tenure and secure financial management.

j)     A 5 yearly review and report, provided to the Local Authority for the duration of the plan demonstrating the ecological improvements within the site.

 

The Woodland Management Plan shall be implemented as approved and within a timescale agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: Required to ensure that woodland areas are satisfactorily safeguarded, managed and maintained in the long term /in perpetuity in the interest of nature conservation and the visual amenity of the area and to mitigate the impact of the proposed development in accord with Policies DM9 and CP14A of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework.”

 

As the application triggered the Council’s Public Speaking scheme, Mr Geoff France spoke on behalf of the applicant on the application.

 

Members noted a consultation response submitted by Natural England in respect of the application. Members acknowledged Natural England’s request for a Construction Environment Management Plan in reference to the Basingstoke Canal Site of Special Scientific Interest and agreed to amend Condition 14 of the Officer Report in order to allow for consultation with Natural England on the submission of the Construction Management Plan.

 

The officer recommendation to grant the application was proposed by Councillor Helen Whitcroft, seconded by Councillor Robin Perry and put to the vote and carried.

 

RESOLVED that

     I.        application 21/0769 be granted subject to the conditions in the officer report and planning updates, as amended; and

    II.        the wording of the amended condition be agreed by the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Ward Councillors.

Note 1

It was noted for the record that Councillors Helen Whitcroft and Morgan Rise declared that they had met with the applicant but came to the meeting with an open mind.

 

Note 2

In accordance with Part 4, Section D, paragraph 18 of the Constitution, the voting in relation to the application was as follows:

 

Voting in favour of the officer recommendation to refuse the application:

 

Councillors Graham Alleway, Peter Barnett, Cliff Betton, Stuart Black, Mark Gordon, David Lewis, Robin Perry, Darryl Ratiram, Morgan Rise, Graham Tapper, Victoria Wheeler, Helen Whitcroft and Valerie White.