MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD AT 7.15PM ON 2nd MARCH 2020 IN THE UPPER ROOM, LANCASTER HALL
Present: Cllr G Esteves (Chair), Cllr A Beames, Cllr Brooker, Cllr J Manktelow, Cllr P Oven and Coral Davis (Deputy Clerk)
Also present: Borough Councillor P Sheard
1. Apologies for Absence There were no apologies.
2. Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest.
3. Minutes
The Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 17th February 2020 were approved and signed by the Chairman.
4. Planning applications responses:
19/P/02191 Oldlands, Burnt Common Lane
Proposed erection of 30 residential dwellings with the associated vehicular and pedestrian access via Burnt Common Lane, car parking, secure cycle storage and landscaping on land off Burnt Common Lane
Agreed response: – Objection
• The housing number for the Oldlands site is included in the allocation for the Guildford Local Plan
• The application in 2014 was for 25 houses and it increased to 32 houses in July 2019 and has now been reduced to 30 houses in February 20
• With respect to the original application and refusal while the site is allocated in the Local Plan and is no longer in the Green Belt, all assessments carried out need to take into account the whole of the Garlick’s Arch site as there are inter-dependencies. The aspects of urban sprawl and the removal of trees are still relevant to this application together with the significant concerns with regard to the adverse effect on the integrity of the TBHSPA, including the deterioration of the quality of the habitat and increased disturbance to birds
• The application for Garlicks Arch and Oldlands should be considered as a whole and not separately in respect of impact on the area:-
o The environmental assessment has been done as a standalone exercise and does not take into account the effect of the development in the remaining Garlick’s Arch site. It is therefore irrelevant.
o The displacement of wildlife must be considered as a whole. There are deer present on this site and with wider development would have nowhere to go. There are reports from local residents that bats are seen every summer evening over the site and therefore a more extensive wildlife survey is required
o The traffic assessment does not take into account the additional traffic from the Garlick’s Arch development
• The exit from Burnt Common Lane onto the Portsmouth Road must be considered alongside the Garlick’s
Arch exit and roundabout so that there is a single access point for both. The junction should be included in the roundabout and there is concern that the balancing pond could interfere with this junction re-alignment
• Regular flooding occurs in this area and this has been seen recently with the storms and rain and a substantial part of the land was flooded. Whilst a balancing pond is included in the design, it will not take all the water. Increased building will exacerbate the problem and will create a huge strain on the infrastructure with a requirement for an upgrade of the whole grey water system
• There are insufficient parking proposals and whilst tandem parking has been introduced on driveways in practice this is unlikely to be adhered to and residents would park on the road. There is no facility to park on Burnt Common Lane as it is already full with parking and there is insufficient parking available in Burnt Common Close
1
SPC Planning Committee 02.03.20
• The waste collection proposals are inadequate for a number of reasons including:-o Width of the roadway
o Turning space outside plots 6&7
o Concerns about collection from the bin store outside the flats and responsibility for putting the bins out
o Storage of bins at a number of properties
o No collection from plots 1-4 with residents expected to take their bin to a designated area
• There are no facilities included in this proposal or for Garlick’s Arch and there will be a high demand for services
• In light of the Climate Emergency the removal of trees must be considered together with the energy efficiency of the properties with regard to heating systems and solar panels. Also charging points should be included for all properties
• Section 106 contributions should be ensuring that the issues caused by the development are resolved and not compromised or undermined because there is no CIL currently adopted
Based on all of the above the Parish Council believes that this application cannot realistically be considered as a separate development. All assessments carried out are standalone and do not take into account the impact of the remainder of this site in the allocation.
20/P/00221 Branches, Clandon Road
Proposed erection of two pairs of semi-detached two storey dwellings (four units) with integral garage and construction of an additional access to the highway following demolition of the existing dwelling and garage Agreed response: – Objection. The Parish Council objects strongly to this application.
When the Guildford Local Plan was adopted the village of Send was inset to facilitate the plan. The housing numbers for the village were agreed in the Plan and this proposal undermines the Plan as it is another windfall development on land that is not included in the Plan or the LAA. This brings the total of additional houses from April 2019 to 150 in Send alone alongside the 665 houses already allocated in the Local Plan. There is no proven need for this additional housing.
It is also noted that locally another site has had all the trees cleared in preparation for a planning application and this goes against the Climate Emergency declared by GBC
There is currently one property on the site with the proposal to build four properties which is overdevelopment of the plot. The design of the proposal is out of keeping with the surrounding properties. The site is on a very busy road which will get very much busier with the very large developments planned close by. The property is less than 100 metres from the existing Burnt Common roundabout and will be a similar distance from the proposed new roundabout on Clandon Road
19/P/01003 Land to the north of Heath Drive
Outline planning application for 29 residential dwellings including means of access, layout and scale (appearance and landscaping to be reserved)
Agreed response: – Objection. A response was agreed to recommend to the Council meeting on 16.03.20
20/T/00049 Greenheys, Send Marsh Road
Oak (T1) – reduce in height by no more than 3 metres to suitable secondary growth points retaining tree to a finished height of up to 14 metres and reduce lateral spread by 2 metres to suitable secondary growth points to a finished spread of 12 metres (Tree Preservation Order no 2 of 2008)
Agreed response: – No comment
20/P/00304 Deramar, 11 Send Close
Erection of a single storey rear extension including one roof lantern and changes to fenestration, following demolition of existing conservatory and detached garage
Agreed response: – No comment
20/P/00323 Isington, Tannery Lane
Erection of a single storey side extension including one roof light and a two storey rear extension including insertion of Juliet balcony along with changes to fenestration
Agreed response: – No comment
2
SPC Planning Committee 02.03.20
5. Other applications received after the agenda had been prepared
20/P/00355 182 Send Road
Single storey side/rear extension following demolition of existing conservatory
Agreed response: – No comment
19/P/01648 1 and 2 Send Parade Close – Appeal
Construction of 6 dwellings following demolition of Nos 1 and 2 Send Parade Close
Agreed response: – Objection. Submit response from meeting on 21.10.19 to The Planning Inspectorate
6. To receive an update of previous applications:-
20/P/00018 The Presbytery, Send Marsh Road – Certificate of Lawfulness for single storey extension
REFUSED
8. Date of the next Planning Committee
The next Planning Committee meeting will be on Monday 16th March 2020 at 7.15pm
The meeting closed at 8.05pm