Agenda item

This application will consider the details of mature tree planting incorporated into an enhanced Landscape and Ecology Management Plan; and details of works (to include low level fencing and reed bed protection) to provide for the separation of the infiltration basin shown also therein, submitted pursuant to Conditions 42 and 39 respectively of planning permission SP13/01553/SCC dated 25 September 2014.

An update sheet was tabled and is attached as Annex 1 to the Minutes.

Officers:

Alan Stones, Planning Development Control Team Manager

Nancy el-Shatoury, Principal Lawyer

Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning Team Manager

Stephen Jenkins, Deputy Planning Development Manager

Mark O’Hare, Senior Planning Officer Development Control

William Flaherty, Planning Officer (Eco Park)

Speakers:

Malcolm Robertson, a local resident, made representations in objection to the application.  The following points were made:

·         Long standing resident of Shepperton and member of Charlton Lane Community Liaison Group

·         Called for an adjournment on the grounds of predetermination to gain legal advice and to allow longer for the Committee to read reports.

David Allen addressed the Committee on behalf of Andrea Koskela, the following points were made:

·         An architect who runs a large scale landscaping company

·         The management plan had specified planting of 25 trees per 250 metres for the screening

·         Small inadequate trees had been proposed which would take years to grow

·         The management provision of watering the trees would be expensive and difficult to operate

·         Planning consent would last for 5 years, after there would be no requirement to maintain the trees

Karen Howkins, a local resident, made representation in objection to this application.  The following points were made:

·         Expressed SITA gave lack of consultation and documentation, only ten copies of the plans were made available and documents were not easily accessible

·         Questioned who was responsible for the application

·         Trees would not absorb impact of the Eco Park including sounds and smells

·         Water drainage system was inadequate

Peter Francis, a local resident, made representation in objection to this application.  The following points were made:

·         A Chemical Engineer

·         In documentation there had been no mention of a fire risk

·         An assessment should determine the minimum space required for a vegetation free zone.

Carol Box, a local resident, made representation in objection to this application.  The following points were made:

·         Expressed that adverse reactions had not been weighed against benefits of which there are none

·         Untried incineration techniques in a residential area

·         Council has a duty to consider any possible impacts.  The application was considered too dangerous for plants in Wisley, questioned why this was acceptable for Spelthorne.

Gareth Philips of SITA, spoke in response to the objectors as the applicant.  He raised the following points:

·         The LEMP had been approved in May 2013, today was an update following new conditions attached in September 2014.

·         Consultee responses were approved

·         Planting would not occur alongside the motor way and the tree maintenance obligation was 25 years, not 5.

·         The trees would only be planted for visual screening, they would have a negligible effect on noise.

·         The current scheme was an updated and improved version and there was no reason to decline following the Ombudsman’s acceptance.

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Planning Development Control Team Manager introduced the report and informed the Committee that the amendment to the scheme had already been permitted.  He stated that the purpose of planting trees was not to hide the Eco Park but to break up the image.  The Committee was informed that both the County Landscaper and Rights of Way accepted what had been proposed.  There had been no objections from consultees including Spelthorne Borough Council.

2.    A Member told the Committee that this application had been called in due to resident concerns.  

3.    Concern was raised over the term ‘mature’.  Officers expressed from a professional view that this was a reasonable and acceptable term.  The Members expressed a view that trees with a bigger girth then those proposed for planting should be sourced.  It was suggested that this should be conditioned and different aged trees should be sourced and planted.  It was noted that the Landscape Architects confirmed the scale of what had been proposed was acceptable.

4.    In response to the SITA representatives contention that tree screening has a negligible effect on residents, a Member informed the Committee that residents in her division had expressed noise relief from planting trees beside a motorway, this meant it was a possibility the planted trees would obscure the sound.

5.    The Committee said that if there were 25 trees per 250 meters then this would equal to 1 tree per 10 meters, it was expressed this would not be sufficient.  Officers stated that feather trees would provide an understory.  The Planning Control Development Team Manager furthered that by stating Surrey had won awards for restoration schemes and therefore being guided by officers was reasonable.  It was also important to be reasonable and proportionate with regard to conditions imposed.

Actions/Further information to be provided:

None.

RESOLVED:

·         The Committee APPROVED the details of an enhanced Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (as shown in Figure 1: Landscape and Ecology Management Plan, Revision D dated December 2014 and Figure 4: Screening Planting to Eastern Boundary, dated December 2014), and details of low level fencing and reed bed protection contained in letter dated 22 December 2014, agent reference: 1324-01/ARB (as shown in Drawing Title: Fencing Proposals, Drawing Number 1353-01-SK009), submitted pursuant to conditions 42 and 39 of planning permission reference: SP13/01553/SCC dated 25 September 2014, contained in application reference: SP13/01553/DC4, subject to conditions set out in the report.

·         Having regard to Councillor Ian Beardsmore’s reference to a minimum tree girth of 40cm and concerns about the adequacy of Extra Heavy Standard speciments, the Committee also agreed an additional condition: to condition that that 25 mature trees should be planted. ).  The reason is to meet the intentions of the original condition.