Agenda item

Detailed landform and planting design proposals for Phase 1 within Manor Farm submitted pursuant to Condition 46 (part discharge of condition) of planning permission ref: SP/2012/01132 dated 23 October 2015.

Officers:

Stephen Jenkins, Deputy Planning Development Manager

Caroline Smith, Planning Development Manager

Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal Solicitor

Speakers:

·         No Members of the public registered to speak on the item.

·         Denise Turner-Stewart, Local Member, registered to speak but was unable to attend the meeting.  A document provided by Cllr Turner-Stewart was tabled at the meeting and is appended to these minutes at Annex C.  

Richard Walsh, Local Member, made the following points:

1.    Stated that he was speaking as Local Member as a request from residents.

2.    Buckland Primary School feel their views have not been taken into account.

3.    There are concerns about the design, particularly the depth of the water given the close proximity to the school

4.    There are concerns about the prospect of having barbed wire on the fencing and the safety implications this could bring.

5.    Residents were concerned about the sensitivity of the site given its close proximity to their properties.

6.    Residents quality of life will be seriously affected for 5-10 years as a result of this development

7.    Asked the Committee to be satisfied that the every provision possible is put in place to minimise the effect on residents and that the applicant adheres to all the requirements detailed in the report.

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The application is a details pursuant relating to the permission granted in 2015 for the extraction of sand and gravel.

2.    Details of the landscape and planting scheme application for Phase 1 are covered in the report. 

3.    There has been one objection in relation to the application.  The issue raised has been dealt with in paragraphs 41 and 47 of the officer report.  No objections have been raised by technical consultees.

4.    The Chairman enquired about the Community Liaison Group and whether the school had been consulted.  The Deputy Planning Development Manager explained that the case officer had been in direct communication with the school and confirmed that a representative from the school would be on the Community Liaison Group.

5.    A Member of the Committee pointed out that planning permission had already been granted in 2015.  The objections regarding the fence construction and deep water were not relevant to this details pursuant application, but the previous application.

6.    The Chairman informed the Committee that this item was called-in by the Local Member for the Committee to review.

7.    A Member of the Committee highlighted that more people die from drowning than in fires, particularly children, and that this should have been a consideration of the application whilst in the design stage.  The Deputy Planning Development Officer explained that the proximity of the lake to the school was discussed as part of the original application which the school had made a representation on.  From a technical viewpoint, this application met the conditions set out.

8.    There was some discussion about the Community Liaison Group as the report referred to this as still being in the set-up stage.  A Member suggested that the Committee consider adding an informative stating that a Community Liaison Group should be set up to develop proactive and positive relationships between both parties.  Once established and operational, the group could perhaps meet twice a year.

9.    A Member suggested there needed to be some clarity as to whether the school was going to use the conservation study area as proposed in the application, or not, as this would have an impact on how the site would be managed over the next 25 years.  The Deputy Planning Development Manager explained that this was an issue to be taken forward by the Community Liaison Group rather than one that should be considered in relation to this details pursuant application.  It was further added that the Community Liaison Group was not part of the Scheme but part of the management process.

10.  Cllr Walsh informed the Committee that the case officer had been working with the Local Members and residents to create a Community Liaison Group and whilst a date had not yet been fixed, Cllr Walsh was hopeful that a meeting would take place in December 2017 or January 2018.

11.  A Member highlighted that as management and governing bodies of schools change in time, the management committee needed to be cognisant of this when considering plans for the future.

12.  The Chairman informed the Committee that as Cllr Walsh had clarified that the organisation of the Community Liaison Group was happening, the suggestion of adding an informative was not necessary.

13.  The Chairman moved the recommendation to approve.  The vote to approve was unanimous.

RESOLVED

That application SP12/01132/SCD9 – Land at Manor Farm, Ashford Road and Worple Road and land west of Queen Mary Reservoir, Ashford Road, Laleham, Surrey be APPROVED.