Agenda item

Details of a pre and post development condition survey (method statement) pursuant to Condition 20 (ii) of appeal ref: APP/B3600/A/11/2166561 dated 15 August 2015.

Officers:

Samantha Murphy, Principal Planning Officer

Alan Stones, Planning Development Team Manager

Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning Manager

Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor

Speakers:

Mr. Everett, a local resident, made representations in objection to the application. He made the following points:

1.    That the Committee defer the item as it should not be viewed as a stand alone but alongside the Traffic Management Plan.

2.    Concern was raised over potential tree damage that could be caused by HGVs and if this would be monitored at all.

3.    It was requested that a tree development survey be conducted to assess the potential damage and that a Tree Preservation Order be put in place.

Mrs. Smith, a local resident, made representations in objection to the application. she made the following points:

1.    That the significance of the sunken lanes and the damage HGVs would have on the fragile environment should be considered by the committee members as pictures had not been included in the report.

2.    A survey of the camber  was requested as the angle of the lane could cause the HGVs to tilt and potentially caused damage to the surrounding area.

3.    Referenced the report stating that damage had to be recorded within 48 hours of the event. It was stressed that this was  more than  sufficient amount of time and that specific measures for emergencies needed to be put in place to avoid any further damage.

4.    The local resident raised concerns over the debris left on the lane by HGVs as this would cause issues with the surrounding environment. 

Ms. Elcoate, a local resident, made representations on behalf of Mr. Simmons in objection to the application. She made the following points:

1.    Concern about the potential damage that would be caused by HGVs to the exposed tree roots on the banks of the lane. It was asked that any work carried out should be by competent, qualified arborists and in accordance with the British Standard 3998 Tree work Recommendations. 

Mr. Elliott, the applicant’s agent, made the following points in response:

1.    He confirmed to the Committee that the HGVs would be fitted with video cameras and that a survey of the lane would be completed daily to record any impact to the environment.

2.    The Committee were assured that the whole focus was to protect the trees in the area and that every step would be taken to do so. The lanes width and  canopy had  been taken into account in regards to the HGVs size  and that they were deemed suitable.

3.    The applicant’s agent highlighted that a convoy system had been implemented for the HGVs to prevent speeding and stop overtaking therefore reducing damage to the environment.

4.    It was confirmed that if damage were to occur in the lane that there would be an immediate response rather than waiting 48 hours.

5.    The applicant’s agent highlighted that risk assessments had been carried out from the beginning of the project and that the trees would be pruned if necessary.

6.    It was noted that the camber of the lane had been taken into account from the very beginning and that measurements confirmed that there was not an issue.

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    Officers introduced the report and the update sheet tabled at the meeting. The details of the report were outline to the Committee in which it was confirmed  that 17 letters of objection had been received. Officers circulated and tabled picture evidence of the sunken lanes to be considered by the committee. In response to the local residents concerns, the Officer agreed to add an informative to ensure that if any tree works were to arise, that they would be completed by a qualified arborist and in accordance with the British Standard 3998 Tree work recommendations.

2.    Members discussed the different methods of tree protection that had been considered in the report and discussed the possibility of constructing jersey barriers along the banks of the lane to offer protection to the nearby trees. After further discussion the construction of jersey barriers along the side of the lane was deemed unreasonable. 

3.    Officers referred to the Inspector's report for the Appeal Decision and how this set the context for planning conditions under consideration and in particular read through paragraphs 70 and 71.  The Planning Inspector had noted that although the lane was narrow, it was never smaller than the size of a HGV. The Planning Inspector also stated that the prevention of damage was key and that realism was necessary about the level of risk and that fears were somewhat overstated.  The Planning Inspector noted additional preventative measures which inhibited movement and access could be worse, but that the use of CCTV cameras and daily inspections of the sunken lanes would be helpful.  Members' attention was also drawn to the wording of Condition 20 and the specific requirements to be addressed.

Resolved:

That application MO/2016/1848 - Land at Bury Hill Wood, off Coldharbour Lane, Holmwood, Surrey RH5 6HN was approved subject to conditions and reasons set out in the report.

Actions/further information to be provided:

1.    To include an informative to ensure that if any tree works were to arise, that they would be completed by a qualified arborist and in accordance with the British Standard 3998 Tree work recommendations.