Agenda item

The application was for the erection of a detached three storey building to comprise of 10 two bedroom apartments, associated parking, access, stores and landscaping.  This was to follow demolition of existing semi-detached dwellings. (Amended plan rec'd 28/11/2018.)

Members were advised of the following updates and the referenced appendices published with the supplementary agenda papers:

“Representation

An objection has been received on behalf of Tekels Park Residents and Tekels Community Association (see Appendix 2).  The issues raised include: street scene and design, environmental impact of the proposal, layout, scale and density, parking and road / pedestrian safety, amenity impact. 

The applicant circulated a response to Members, also appended (Appendix 3). 

Officer’s comment: These issues are broadly covered in the Committee Report.

Amended recommendation and additional condition

·         Following concerns that were raised about the management and maintenance of the flat roof, the applicant has agreed to accept a condition to agree the details of Management and Maintenance with the LPA.  As such the following condition is recommended to be added to the decision notice:

17. Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, a Management and Maintenance Plan, for the external surfaces and flat roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason: In the interests of residential and visual amenities of the area and to accord with Policy DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012.

·         The applicant has completed a legal agreement to secure SAMM and Affordable Housing contributions and as such the recommendation changes from - GRANT subject to conditions and completion of a legal agreement: to - GRANT subject to conditions.”

As the application had triggered the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Ms Lynne Wallis, on behalf of the Tekels Community Association, and Mr Peter Aggleton spoke in objection to the application. Mr Neil Davis, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

Members felt the scheme was out of keeping with the Wooded Hills Character Area. It was considered that the proposal would have had a significant adverse impact on the existing street scene. In particular Members had reservations over the potential for the dominance of parking in the street scene and remained unconvinced whether the proposal’s contemporary design and building form complemented the existing streetscape. It was noted that there were specific concerns in respect to the design’s flat roof and panelled finishing. All of these factors in combination with the proposal’s net density were considered to be a negative contrast to the semi-rural character of the area.

The Committee felt that there were insufficient parking spaces in relation to the number of proposed units and were concerned this would result in overspill to on?street parking. In addition there were concerns as to potential negative effects on the private estate’s road network.

An alternative motion to refuse the application for the reasons below was proposed by Councillor Robin Perry and seconded by Councillor Colin Dougan. The recommendation was put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that

                      I.        Application 18/0616 be refused for the reasons following:

·            Out of keeping with the Wooded Hills Character Area.

·           Damaging effect on the existing street scene, including dominance of parking, inappropriate design, bulk and building form

·           Insufficient parking provision

·           Negative impact upon the private estate’s road network and residential amenity.

·           Net density

                    II.        The reasons for refusal be finalised by the Executive Head of Regulatory after consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Applications Committee, and the Planning Case Officer.

Note 1

It was noted for the record Councillor Edward Hawkins declared that:

i.              Members of the Committee had attended a Member Site Visit on the application and,

ii.            All members of the Committee had received various pieces of correspondence on the application.

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 recommendation to refuse the application for the reasons outlined above:

Councillors Nick Chambers, Mrs Vivienne Chapman, Colin Dougan, Edward Hawkins, Jonathan Lytle, David Mansfield, Adrian Page, Robin Perry, Ian Sams, Conrad Sturt, Pat Tedder, Victoria Wheeler and Valerie White.