The Minutes of the previous
meeting were approved as a correct record subject to the following
amendments:
That under Minute 175/17
paragraph 2 of ‘key points’ should read:
Measures
for traffic management which could include things such as jersey
barriers could affect the way in which you would be able to view
the bank and therefore restore and protect the bank, therefore
should be considered after traffic management and not
before.
That under Minute 175/17 the
following be added to paragraph 3 of ‘key points’ after
the third sentence:
Yet
Members were concerned that no preventative measures were
proposed.
That under Minute 176/17,
‘Speakers’ paragraph 3 should read:
It was
stated that data of vehicle movements had only been received after
requests had been made by local residents. The local Member asked that in future these
requests be answered in good time.
That under Minute 176/17, the
last sentence of paragraph 2 of ‘key points’ raised
should read:
The
Committee agreed to add an informative to ask the applicant to
submit vehicle movement data in advance of each six monthly liaison
meeting.
181/17
PETITIONS
Share this item
To receive any petitions from
members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 65 (please
see note 7 below).
All Members present are required to
declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible
thereafter
(i)Any disclosable pecuniary interests and /
or
(ii)Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in
respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this
meeting
NOTES:
·Members are reminded that they must not participate
in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary
interest
·As well as an interest of the Member, this includes
any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the
Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the
Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)
·Members with a significant personal interest may
participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that
interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.
MO/2016/1563 - Land at Bury Hill Wood, Coldharbour Lane, Holmwood, Surrey RH5 6HN
Share this item
The installation of
perimeter security fencing consisting of 2 metre (m) high Heras
fencing and 3m high deer fencing; an office and wc at the site
entrance; and office, welfare accommodation, water fuel and a
generator, all ancillary to and in association with appeal decision
APP/B3600/A/11/2166561 dated 7 August 2015.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Speakers:
Hazel Watson, the Local Member,
made the following points:
The Local Member
referenced the final paragraph of paragraph 13 of the report which
stated that ‘all planting implemented pursuant to
this permission shall be maintained in good, healthy condition and
be protected from damage for five years from the completion of site
restoration’. It was asked that this wording be reflected
in the Conditions to ensure that the protection from damage was
enforceable. It was also asked that programme be implemented to
monitor the restoration of trees and shrubs on the
site.
Key points
raised during the discussion:
ThePrincipal Planning Officer introduced
the report and the update sheet tabled at the meeting and attached
to these minutes. It was explained that the application was for the
approval of Condition 14 of an appeal decision which was for an
exploratory well site on land at Bury Hill Wood. It was stated that
Condition 14 details a Landscape and Restoration Scheme for the
applicant site for when drilling work and decommissioning have
finished to return the land back to an after use compatible with
forestry and to assist in absorbing the site back into the local
landscape as soon as practicable. The Committee were informed of
further details of the application in which it was noted that 27
letters of representation had been received and that the concerns
of both Capel Parish Council and Leith
Hill Action Group (LHAG) were outlined in the report. No technical
objections had been received.
A
Member of the Committee referred to the Local Member’s
comments regarding the restoration of the site and asked if these
comments were addressed in Condition 2. The Planning Officer
confirmed that these comments were addressed in Condition 2 of the
report.
Members sought clarification on Japanese Knotweed in which it
was confirmed that the applicant had committed to spraying the
Japanese Knotweed in the first available spraying season and to
continue spraying up until the end of the aftercare period.
A
discussion was had on adding clarification to Condition 2 on who
would be responsible to replace any trees that die over the next
five years. Planning Officers confirmed that would be the
responsibility with whoever had responsibility of the land at that
time. It was asked that discussions be had with the legal team
regards to the wording of Condition 2to make it clearer.
The resolution of the Committee was
unanimous
Resolved:
That application MO/2016/1752 Land at Bury Hill Wood: Condition
14 Landscape and Restoration Management Plan was approved subject
to conditions and reasons set out in the report
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
187/17
SP12/01487 - Land at Watersplash Farm, Gaston Bridge Road and Fordbridge Road, Shepperton, Surrey, TW16 6AU
Share this item
Proposed extraction of
concreting aggregate from land at Watersplash Farm together with the erection of
processing plant and associated mineral infrastructure, the
provision of a new access from the Gaston Bridge Road/Green Lane
roundabout, restoration involving the importation of inert
restoration materials to agriculture, flood meadows, lake and reed
beds with public access, on a site of 28 ha, and temporary
diversion of public footpath 53 for the duration of
operations.
Details of a
mitigation scheme to reduce and manage noise from the use of the
wood chipper; a scheme for disposing of surface water; mature
native planting of local provenance across the full extent of the
eastern boundary of the application site; and the colours to be
used on the external surfaces of all new structures to be
constructed on the application site, submitted pursuant to
Conditions 8, 11, 13 and 14 of planning permission ref:
WO/2015/0605 dated 18 August 2016.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The Planning Development Team Manager introduced the
report and informed the Committee that the application was a
details pursuant following from the planning permission received in
August 2016. The details of the application related to noise,
surface water drainage, planting and the colours of the items on
the site. The concerns of local residents were highlighted as well
as comments received from the local Member.
The Planning Development Team Manager read out
comments made by the local Member who
stated that a drawing received in April 2016 was not realistic and
did not cover the detail that was necessary to understand what was
proposed and how noise would be mitigated. The Planning Development
Team Manager replied to the Local Members comments referencing the
details outlined in the report regarding the concrete structure
built to mitigate noise levels. The Committee noted that the Noise
Consultant was satisfied with this strategy. Further points in the
report were highlighted which confirmed that the site would
continue to be monitored as the site progressed.
A Member queried the possibility of control measures
to mitigate noise levels not being satisfactory. He asked for confirmation that if that was the
case that further noise insulation be put in place later.
ThePlanning Development Team Manager
highlighted that the conditions stated a certain noise level and if
that was exceeded then it would be the applicant’s
responsibility to ensure these standards were met.
The Planning Development Team Manager confirmed that
there was not enough space to have more than a single line of
planting and that a number of species were proposed to be
planted.
The resolution of the Committee was
unanimous
Resolved:
That application WO/2017/0102 - Elm Nursery, Sutton Green Road,
Sutton Green, Guildford, Surrey GU4 7QD be approved subject to the
conditions and reasons set out in the report.
Non-material amendment
of planning permission ref: SP16/01220/SCC dated 23 September 2016
to allow for minor changes in the construction and design of the
Charlton Lane Eco Park Development.
Stephen Jenkins, Deputy Planning Development Manager
Alan Stones, Planning Development Team Manager
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The DeputyPlanning
Development Manager introduced the report and informed members that
it the proposal was for 36 non-material amendments that arose
during the construction of the project. It was highlighted that
permission had already been granted and that the current
application was to approve the amendments. The
Deputy Planning Development Manager listed the details of
the report stated that as a whole this did no constitute a material
change.
A Member of the Committeeraised concerns over the wording used in the report and how it
could be portrayed to members of the public. It was said that the
description of ‘material’ and
‘non-material’ used in the report could be easily
misunderstood and that information on how this is decided could be
clearer and better publicised. Members
noted details of the report which could be seen as misrepresented
and how the description of ‘material’ and
‘non-material’ changes were possibly
inaccurate.
The Member went on to discuss the consultation
process of the application and stressed that local residents could
have been better communicated with and informed of the changes at
the site. The Deputy Planning Development
Manager responded to the Members comments regarding the
consultation process by stating that the government states that it
is discretionary and that publicity and consultation was not
mandatory in this case. It was noted that a Local Liaison Group
which included local residents were informed of these changes prior
to the application being received. Officers stated that site
notices were put up and that consultation was had with the local
district authority as well as the local residents association and
the three Local Members. Officers went on to confirm that they
believed that this consultation was appropriate due to the nature
of the changes.
Members of the Committee questioned if the Local
Liaison Group had been informed once the application had been
received. Officers confirmed that the group had been informed
before the application was received and that once received it was
published on the Surrey County Council website, district website
and site notices were put up.
Members of the Committee made clear that the
description of ‘material’ and non-material’
amendments should be better publicised to prevent further
confusion. Officers agreed to include
clarification of what ‘material’ and
non-material’ amendments were, with examples of these, on the
Surrey County Council website.
Resolved:
That application SP13/01153/SCA1 - Charlton Lane Waste
Management Facility, Charlton Lane, Shepperton, TW17 8QA be approved subject to the
conditions and reasons set out in the report.
The
erection of a two storey building to provide 8 x general teaching
rooms, 3 x art class rooms, a chapel and other associated
facilities, refurbishment of parts of the existing music and
science blocks, creation of new tennis court / coach parking and
hard play area, creation of 17 additional car parking spaces and 20
additional cycle parking spaces, landscaping and other associated
works.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The Senior Planning Officer
introduced the report and the update sheet tabled at the meeting.
It was explained that the application proposed to expand St Peters
school from a 6 forms of entry to a 7 forms of entry school which
would mean an increase of 150 pupils. It was confirmed that a
stand-alone two story building would be erected in the centre of
the site and that refurbishment of other parts of the site were
planned. Further details of the application were confirmed in which
the Committee noted that four letters of objection had been
received and that an objection had been received from Sport England
due to the loss of playing field land. Therefore this application would need to be
referred to the Secretary of State.
Members highlighted the necessity of the application due to the
urgent need for school places in the area. It was stated that
although there were traffic concerns that the school had a good
record of mitigation by supporting transport by non-car
modes.
Members discussed the design process for school buildings and
how it was of the opinion of some, that the quality could be
improved. The Planning Development Control Manager explained that
the design of the schools followed rules set out in a development
plan which ensured the building met requirements. It was stated
that further alterations would have cost implications.
A
Member of the Committee highlighted the objection received from
Sport England and asked if the council allowed for a right of
reply. The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the school had
considered the comments but decided that the playing field would
not be used differently following the development.
Members raised concerns about the two trees which would be
removed to accommodate two parking spaces at the site. Members
sought clarification over the size of the trees which would replace
the ones removed. Officers confirmed that the two trees had
previously been given permission to be removed by Guildford Borough
Council therefore the principle of the trees being removed had
already been established. Officers also
confirmed that appropriate replacement trees would be planted at
the site.
Due to Members possibly being unaware of the location of the
site, Members asked that phrases such as ‘vicinity’ and
‘surrounding area’ were not used and that the report
was more specific when explaining details of the area. Officers
highlighted that the report did include detail of what constitutes
the local area. It was stated that, if helpful, a plan would be
included in future reports to further clarify what was meant by the
local area.
Members sought clarification on the hours of working for the
site which the officer stated that these would usually be
implemented at the local district level. It was stated that if the
Committee wished, these conditions could be reflected in the
...
view the full minutes text for item 190/17
The
erection of a two storey building to provide 12 general teaching
classrooms and associated works including the creation of 6
additional car parking spaces and 10 additional cycle parking
spaces, extension of internal access road, creation of soakaway,
hard landscaping works and works to trees.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The Principal Planning Officer introduced the report
and the update sheet tabled at the meeting. Members were informed
that the application proposed to build a two story teaching block
which would facilitate the expansion from an 8 forms of entry to a
9 forms of entry school. It was confirmed that nine letters of
objection had been received that were mostly in regard to the
increase of traffic movements in the area.
Members spoke about the urgent need for school
places in the area.
A discussion was had around the design of the school
in regards to air quality control in which officers stated that
guidance was received from the Air Quality Consultation and that in
this case they were satisfied with the design.
Members questioned the reasoning behind the
cancelling of the school bus which officers confirmed that the
cancellation of the bus was due to lack of pupils using it and
therefore making it economically unviable.
Resolved:
That application RU.17/0060 - Land at Salesian School, Guildford Road, Chertsey, Surrey
KT16 9LU be approved subject to reasons and conditions set out in
the report.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
The
Committee adjourned at 12.35pm for lunch and the Committee
reconvened at 13.03pm.
Marissa Heath gave her apologies for the afternoon session of
this meeting.
The infilling of the
former quarry void with inert waste as defined in Regulation 7 (4)
of the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002, together with
any engineering materials necessary to line and cap the site and
soils for restoration without compliance with Condition 3 of
planning permission ref: TA94/0980/A3 dated 6 June 2007 for a
further eight years.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The Planning Officer introduced the item and
informed the Committee of the applications details outlined in the
report. It was stated that 10 letters of representation had been
received that were specifically in relation to the recent
consultation which was covered in the officers report and the
update sheet tabled at the meeting. The Committee noted two typos
in the report which were in paragraph 72 which referred to a draft
section 106 agreement being appended which it should state a
‘draft heads of term’ and in paragraph 95 it writes
Sand Martin nests become ‘invested’ when it should
state ‘infested’.
Members drew attention to condition 10 which stated
that HGV movements would include some Saturdays. The Planning Officer stated that this was an
oversight and that the applicant agreed that there would be no
movements on Saturdays. Therefore reference to Saturday HGV
movements would be removed from Condition 10.
In response to a Member query it was explained that
this site was originally granted permission back in the 1970s and
that it was always to be restored to its original
state. All mineral workings have to be
reinstated to something appropriate to the area.
Resolved:
That subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 Agreement
to secure a routing agreement for HGV vehicles accessing and
egressingOxted Sandpit, to permit applicationTA11/1075 - Oxted Sandpit, Barrow Green
Road, Oxted, Surrey, RH8 0NJ subject to
conditions.
That the following changes to conditions, as stated in the
submitted report be amended:
·Reference to Saturday HGV movements would be removed
from Condition 10
·That Condition 13 stipulates the hours and days of
operation for maintenance.
·That Condition 26 be amended to include damage to
existing nests.
Installation and
retention of a bunded fuel storage, wheel wash, site reception
offices, weighbridge and hardstanding and the upgrade to the site
access; and temporary use of them in connection with the
backfilling with inert waste material and restoration to
agriculture on land at Oxted Sandpit.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor
Key points
raised during the discussion:
The Principal Planning Officer introduced the report and the
update sheet tabled at the meeting and informed Members that the
application proposed the installation and retention of a
bunded fuel storage, wheel wash, site
reception offices, weighbridge and hardstanding and the upgrade to the site access.
The Officer outlined further details of the report and confirmed
that 10 letters of representation had been received.
Resolved:
That application TA13/1653 - Land at Oxted Sandpit, Barrow Green Road, Oxted, Surrey, RH8 0NJ be approved subjected to
conditions set out in the report.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
194/17
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Share this item
The next meeting of the Planning &
Regulatory Committee will be on 14 June 2017.
PDF 266 KB