Agenda item

Application Number: 19/0489 - MATTHEWS CORNER GARAGE, MATTHEWS CORNER, CHURCH ROAD, WINDLESHAM, GU20 6BH

Minutes:

The application was for the erection of a terrace of 3 two storey dwellings and one detached building to accommodate 5 flats with associated bin store, parking and landscaping following demolition of existing buildings on site.

 

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 Councillor Victoria Wheeler, on the grounds that it might have been inappropriate for the conservation area and was not reflective of the guidelines in the Windlesham Neighbourhood Plan.

 

Members were advised of the following updates on the application:

 

Update

 

5 Year Housing Land Supply

 

Since the committee report was written the Council has published its Housing Land Supply Paper 2019-2024.  This confirms that the Borough has a 5.32 years housing land supply.

 

Amendment

 

In light of the above Paragraph 7.3.11 – should be amended follows:

 

Surrey Heath has a 5 year housing land supply at present and Policy CP1 directs housing to sustainable locations in the western side of the borough, and this rural location is considered to be less sustainable. As such, it is not considered that this argument carries any weight in favour of the proposal.  

 

Corrections

 

Paragraph 1.2 – should read ‘the proposal is considered to be inappropriate and harmful development in the Green Belt, meeting none of the exceptions for new buildings within the Green Belt, and would be harmful to openness due to the quantum of built form proposed. Concerns are also raised about the impact of the proposal on the rural character with this proposal introducing a denser, suburban form of development. In addition, the proposal would provide insufficient parking spaces within the plot. It is not considered that the factors advanced by the applicant amount to very special circumstances to outweigh the identified Green Belt harm, and other harm caused. The proposal is therefore recommended for refusal’.

 

Paragraph 7.4.11 – should read ‘In light of the above, the proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CP2 and DM9 of the CSDMP, Principles 6.6, 7.3 and 7.4 of the RDG, Policy WNP2.1 of the Windlesham Neighbourhood Plan’.

 

Paragraph 9.1 – should read ‘The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact on amenity and infrastructure. However, the proposal represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt not meeting any of the exceptions under paragraph 145 of the NPPF. By virtue of the quantum of built form and the spread of development it would also be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt and conflict with its purposes. Moreover, it is considered that the development would cause harm to the character of the area, and failed to provide adequate vehicle parking; and no SAMM payment has been received. There are no very special circumstances to outweigh the identified harm and therefore the application is recommended for refusal’.

 

 

Amended Reason for Refusal

 

2 - The proposed development, by virtue of its layout, plot size, scale, massing and building height would result in an excessive quantum of development that would appear over dominant and visually cramped in this this rural location, which is characterised by spacious low density residential development. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CP2 and DM9 of the Surrey Heath Core Strategy and Development Management Policies 2012, Principles 6.6, 7.3, and 7.4 of the Surrey Heath Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2017, Policy WNP2.1 of the Windlesham Neighbourhood Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.”

 

As the application had triggered the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Ms Rosie Jackson, spoke in support of the application.

 

The recommendation to refuse the application was proposed by Councillor Victoria Wheeler and seconded by Councillor Vivienne Chapman, put to the vote and carried.

 

RESOLVED that application 19/0489 be refused for the reasons set out in the officer report and updates.

 

Note 1

It was noted for the record that:

                        I.        All Committee Members had received a letter in respect of the application.

                       II.         Councillor Rebecca Jennings-Evans declared that:

                                          i.       She was on the Windlesham Parish Council Planning Committee which had provided a consultation response on the application.

                                         ii.      She was on the Windlesham Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

                     III.        Councillor Sam Kay declared that he was on Windlesham Parish Council which had provided a consultation response to the application.

                     IV.        Councillor Pat Tedder declared that she had a non-pecuniary interest, as she was Chairman of the Valley End Management Committee.

 

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:

 

Councillors Graham Alleway, Vivienne Chapman,  Sarah Jane Croke, Colin Dougan, Shaun Garrett, Edward Hawkins, Rebecca Jennings-Evans, Sam Kay, David Lewis, Charlotte Morley, Victoria Wheeler and Helen Whitcroft.

 

Voting against the recommendation to refuse the application:

 

Councillors Morgan Rise and Graham Tapper.

 

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: