Agenda item

The application was for the change of use from equestrian stable building to dwelling (Class C3) with associated curtilage.

This application would have normally been determined under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, however it had been reported to the Planning Applications Committee at the request of the Executive Head of Regulatory.

Members were advised of the following updates on the application:

“Representations

Two further letters of support have been received, including comments in relation to: lack of impact on Green Belt; environmental benefits, and: inconsistency with neighbouring application.

Officer comment:  It is considered that these issues have been sufficiently addressed already in the agenda report.

The applicant has provided tracked comments in response to a number of specific paragraphs within the agenda report, and this has been circulated to Members. The main issues raised by the applicant are grouped as follows:

·         Existing dwelling – current appeal to the Courts [Paragraphs 1.3; 3.14 and 3.15]

Officer comment: If necessary, the Council may agree again to withhold enforcement action in abeyance of any Court decision.

·         Existing dwelling – lawfulness [Paragraphs 2.1; 3.3; 3.4; 3.7; 3.10; 6.1; 7.2.2; 7.2.5]

Officer comment:  The previous decisions of the LPA, Inspectors at appeal and his Honour Judge Seymour (injunction hearing) have determined the existing dwelling to be unlawful, and also considered the Human Rights Act 1998. The Council has also sought legal advice in considering direct action.

·         SAMM payment [Paragraphs 3.12 and 7.7.3]

Officer comment:  As any residential occupation of the land since the SPA designation in 2005 has been unlawful or illegal, the dwelling has not been included in the baseline housing figures.  The LPA can request an extension of time subsequent to the Committee meeting, to allow for payment for SAMM.

Other corrections/additions to report

·         Paragraph 2.1 - [Hook Meadow] is on the fringe of settlement in a residential and commercial road. The ‘carport’ is freestanding and used to repair tractors, tools and vehicles

Officer comment: The site is not on the fringe of a settlement area defined under planning policy. Other comment accepted.

·         3.2 - 2003 - The site has a LDC for hardstanding, shed, field shelter and grazing/leisure use of horses.

Officer comment: The LDC referred to is: 03/0078 - Certificate of lawfulness for the use of land for keeping horses, the retention of a raised car park, animal shelter and shed. Decision: Granted (implemented)

·         4.3 Not boundary fencing it is partitioning fencing.

·         7.1 Council cannot meet five year housing need.

Officer comment: The above is accepted

·         8.0 I was not asked in writing for an extension of time for a decision.

Officer comment: The LPA can request an extension of time subsequent to the Committee meeting, to allow for payment for SAMM and issue of the decision.

Applicant’s response to proposed conditions

·         Condition 1 - I do not agree to one year, it could take that just to get to the court of appeal so I suggest two years.

Officer comment:  If necessary, the Council may agree again to withhold enforcement action in abeyance of any Court decision.

·         Condition 4. -  The floor levels are already at this height

Officer comment:  Accepted, but the condition wording does not need changing

·         Condition 6. - It is requested that this is amended from “date of this decision” to “date of implementation”.

Officer comment:  This is considered acceptable and can be amended as highlighted below, provided that Condition 1 (one year implementation time limit) and Condition 5 (removal of existing dwelling prior to occupation of stable conversion) remain unaltered.

Amended condition 6:

Within one year of the date of implementation, the existing unauthorised dwelling shall be demolished with all resultant debris removed from the land, and its adjacent land reinstated as shown on the proposed site plan ("PSP") received on 23 April 2019, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the openness of the Green Belt and to accord with Policies CP1, DM1 and DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

·         Condition 7. - Subject to a planning application.

Officer comment:  Notwithstanding this condition, any subsequent planning application must be considered on its own merits. Therefore, the condition wording does not need changing.

It is considered that the other issues raised by the applicant have been sufficiently addressed already in the agenda report.”

As the application had triggered the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Miss Sarah Kingsley and Miss Alison Hook, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

The officer recommendation to approve the application was proposed by Councillor Colin Dougan, seconded by Councillor Victoria Wheeler and put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that application 19/0323 be granted, subject to the conditions in the officer report

Note 1

It was noted for the record that:

              i.        All members of the Committee had received various items of correspondence in relation to the application.

             ii.        Councillor Peter Barnett had previously made a representation on the application but emphasised that he came to the meeting with an open-mind.

            iii.        Councillor Victoria Wheeler had previously engaged in correspondence and met the applicant in the past, but came to the meeting with an open-mind.

           iv.        Councillor Helen Whitcroft had previously met the applicant in respect of planning matters.

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 grant the application:

Councillors Graham Alleway, Vivienne Chapman, Sarah Jane Croke, Colin Dougan, Shaun Garrett, Edward Hawkins, Sam Kay, David Lewis, Charlotte Morley, Morgan Rise, Victoria Wheeler, Helen Whitcroft and Valerie White.

Voting against the recommendation to grant the application:

Councillor Peter Barnett

Abstaining on the recommendation to grant the application:

Councillor Cliff Betton