Officers:
Charlotte Parker,
Development Management Team Leader
Officer Introduction:
- The Senior Planning
Policy Officer introduced the report and update sheet and provided
Members with a brief overview. Members noted that the outline
application for the erection of 3-4 storey building was for extra
care accommodation, comprising self-contained apartments, staff and
communal facilities, and associated parking. Appearance and Landscaping reserved. Members
further noted that Condition 4 had been amended to include
reference that it was required prior to the commencement of the
development. Members noted further details as outlined in the
published report.
Speakers:
- Julie
Last spoke in objection to the application and made the following
points:
- That
she was the chair of the Ottershaw Neighbourhood Forum.
- That
a facility of this kind was welcomed however local residents were
concerned with the proposal.
- That
the revised design completely removed one wing of the development
to remove overshadowing and overlooking issues with adjacent
residents. The speaker noted that the proposal had now changed from
three to four storeys and the capacity was increased by 7 units to
a total of 51 units.
- It
was noted that local residents remained convinced that a building
of these proportions in terms of scale, mass and its slab-sided
flat roof design occupying the same plot position as the original
outline proposal was significantly overbearing and out of character
for the surrounding area.
- That
residents could not see how any post outline design could remedy
this and transform it into a structure of landmark value and that
it was exacerbated through the loss of the mature trees which
removed any masking from the tallest part of the
structure.
- That
these issues had been highlighted by many objectors.
- That
the four storey elevation facing Slade Road, due to include
balconies and fenestration, was only 20 metres away from the two
storey frontages at numbers 4 to 10 and would cause a significant
overlooking issue. It was further noted that there was no scope for
screening as the façade was four metres from the site
boundary.
- That
a combination of a reduction of unit numbers, partial reinstatement
of one to two floors of the removed wing, a reduction in the length
of the Brox Road facade and better use of the basement areas,
together with improved roof edge details to mask the flat roof
façade and additional landscaping could all be considered in
order to achieve a design which would better integrate the
surrounding area.
- That
at 25 spaces, parking capacity remained an issue, and was below the
parking standard due to spaces to be used for staff. It was further
noted that there was no on-street parking in the surrounding
area
In
regard to the Ottershaw Local Plan, a Member asked the speaker
whether it included details related to restrictions to the heights
of properties in the area. The speaker stated that the Local Plan
was in its consultation stage and that the Ottershaw Neighbourhood
Forum had submitted comments on potential restrictions to property
height. The speaker further stated that most of the properties in
Ottershaw and surrounding areas were usually two to three storeys
high.
- On
behalf of applicant / Agent, Chris Wilmshurst
made the following points:
- That
the site had been specially selected as it met key sustainability
criteria for extra care housing being in close proximity to
Ottershaw Village Centre.
- The
site previously accommodated a care home which was demolished in
2021 and so the site was well established for the proposal and the
net increase would be marginal.
- The
design meets all the requirements for affordable specialist housing
including being wheelchair accessible throughout and can address
current and future needs of its residents and being in the heart of
the community will reduce reliance on cars for residents and
staff.
- That
proposal had undergone significant changes since the original
submission. This was undertaken in agreement with the planning team
and the aim was to create a landmark building at the corner plot,
which was a well-established design principle at such locations to
act as a focal point. The alterations to the scheme also achieved a
reduction in building footprint, allowing for more landscaping and
drawing the building further away from neighbouring
houses.
- That
the area was not universally two storey housing.
- That
the officer report concludes, subject to detailed design, a
building of this height a massing could successfully be
accommodated on the site. It was further noted that this was an
outline application and appearance is a reserved matter, so the
final design can be subject to further consideration to assure a
quality design was achieved.
Members noted that the rooms were self-contained and included
all the facilities needed for residents to serve their own
purposes. There would also be a community area which included
facilities that all residents can share.
A
Member asked for detail on the max number of units possible over 3
storeys. The speaker explained that 50 units was the minimum number
which could taken on and that standards were rigid with regard to
the size of the units. It noted that it would not be possible to
include 51 units over three storeys.
A Member asked if a
lower number of units would be accommodated if the remaining units
would be included within another scheme. The speaker explained that
units could not automatically be added to other sites due to
constraints.
Members noted that the
original site included two storeys with a plant room
above.
Members noted that
consultation with local residents included online consultation and
evening and daytime meetings.
Key
points raised during the discussion:
- A Member of the
committee stated that the application was a corner site on a main
road and included a builders yard on one side and commercial unit
on the other. Further to this, the Member stated that building land
was not readily available in the south-east for the council to
achieve its objectives for extra care and so developments need to
include additional storeys.
- A Member asked
whether any weight could be put on the emerging local plan. The
officer stated that it was too early to give any weight to the
emerging local plan however weight has been given to the Runnymede
Borough Council design documents which identifies Ottershaw as a
residential area.
- Members discussed the
number of units possible and noted that the proposal would include
up to 51 units.
- A member stated that
they were generally in support of the application due to a severe
need for this type of accommodation however stated that she was
disappointed that the rendering generated showed no windows and due
to the trees, which would not be retained. Members noted that trees
which were due to be removed as noted within the
report.
- Officers confirmed
that it was possible for the application to return to the committee
for consideration on further details.
- A Member stated that
he was concerned with the overbearing nature of four storeys and
felt that three storeys would fit in better in the local area. In
regard to consultation with residents, the Member stated that
planning officers should have opened dialogue with residents to see
what they would support and be in line with the emerging local
plan.
- Officers reminded
Members that they role was to consider the application as submitted
and in line with policy.
- A Member stated that
the need for the building was well-made and that he accepted that
the four-storey element was a way to reach the target number of
units. It was added that the Member felt that the application
should return to the committee for consideration on final
details.
- Members noted that
tree planting was proposed to replace the trees lost.
- A Member stressed the
importance of considering views from the public consultation and
that he would struggle to support the proposal unless the number of
units was reduced to the number included within the initial
proposal. The Chairman added that the committee could only consider
what had been submitted.
- The Chairman stated
that the extra care units were for the local population and that
there was limited land available, and so the council needed to make
the best use of the land available.
- The Chaiman moved the
recommendation which received eight votes in support, two votes in
objection and zero abstentions.
Actions / Further information to be provided:
None.
Resolved:
Pursuant to Regulation
3 of The Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, the
Committee resolves to grant outline planning permission for
application ref: RU.23/0474, subject to the completion of legal
agreement to secure payments (SANG and SAMM) to mitigate the impact
of the development of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection
Area (SPA) and subject to the recommended planning conditions noted
in the published report and update sheet.
That Condition 4 be
amended to include reference that it is required prior to the
commencement of the development.