Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Central Area Development Control Sub Committee held on 16/01/2002
Central Agenda



NOTE FOR MEMBERS

Members are reminded that Contact Officers are shown at the end of each report and members are welcome to raise questions, etc. in advance of the meeting with the appropriate officer.
AGENDA

1. APPOINTMENT OF VICE-CHAIRMAN

To appoint a Vice-Chairman for the remainder of the Council year.

2. MINUTES

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12th December 2001 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

3. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

To receive apologies for absence and to report any substitutions.

4. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY AND OTHER INTERESTS

To receive from members in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting, disclosure of any pecuniary interests which are required to be disclosed by Section 94(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 and any personal non-pecuniary interests in such matters in accordance with paragraph 10 of the National Code of Local Government Conduct.

5. SITE INSPECTION

5.1 Applications for Consideration Following Site Inspection

At its last meeting, the Sub-Committee deferred consideration of the under-mentioned planning application to enable members to inspect the site in question. The site inspection has now been held and a report on the application is submitted for the Sub-Committee’s consideration.

In considering the report, the attention of the Sub-Committee is drawn to the decision of the Development Control Committee, endorsed by the Council, that if an application is deferred to enable a site inspection to be held, there should not be further deferments for second or further site inspections.

WA01/1742
Elsmore Construction
7.9.01
Erection of six dwellings and associated works following demolition of existing buildings, land at Hillbrow Motors, Thursley Road, Elstead as amplified by letter dated 11.12.01.
Grid Reference:E: 490502 N: 143536
Parish:Elstead
Ward:Elstead, Peperharow, Thursley
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV within settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:Recommends conditions
Drainage Authority:Environment Agency - no objection in principle, recommends a condition and informatives.
Parish Council:



Consultations:
The Council have no objection to the development however it does object to the side access to the site, access should be from Thursley Road.

Borough Environmental Health Officer - recommends condition in relation to contamination.
Representations:10 letters have been received 9 objecting on the following grounds:-
1. loss of light to landing window of no. 15
2. loss of sunlight
3. loss of planting area to access
4. access from Thursley Road is preferable
5. over-density
6. loss of privacy
7. noise and disturbance from use of rear access
8. lack of visitor parking for properties at the rear
    9. replacement fence with hedging means loss of privacy and maintenance difficulties
    10. pedestrian access should not be to Staceys Meadow
      11. loss of property value
      12. low cost housing should face Thursley Road
      13. would encourage trespass onto private property
    14 right of way over strip adjacent to cemetery has not been respected
      15. increased highway danger
      16. layout and number of dwellings
    17. segregation of affordable units from remainder of development
      18. excessive hard treatment
      19. lack of protection of monkey puzzle tree
      20. wear and tear on road from construction vehicles
      21. Loss of play area on garage forecourt
1 letter from the Elstead Meadows Management Company Limited withdraws its earlier objection and expresses support for the current scheme but a concern about any further increase in dwellings accessed from Staceys Meadow over 2 dwellings.

Relevant History

WA87/0131Established Use Certificate in respect of transport and motor depot with associated offices, servicing, sales and storageCertificate Issued
22.04.87
WA93/1276Erection of a residential development of 24 dwellings with associated works following demolition of existing buildingsPermitted
22.03.94
Not implemented - expired
WA94/1640Erection of a residential development of 24 dwellings with associated works following demolition of existing buildingsPermitted
28.04.95
Implemented
WA01/872Erection of three attached dwellings with associated garage/store building on part of site following demolition of existing buildingsWithdrawn
18.7.01
WA01/873Erection of one detached dwelling and associated garage/store building on part of site following demolition of existing buildingsWithdrawn
18.7.01

Description of Site/Background

The application site which measures 0.11 ha is the former Hillbrow Motors garage site and is located on the north-west side of Thursley Road within Elstead. The garage has ceased operation about eighteen months ago. The site has since been cleared.

To the west is the cemetery and to the north west a new residential development, Staceys Meadow, which was built pursuant to WA94/1640. Adjacent to the northern side of the site is an existing parking courtyard and garage block serving Staceys Meadow. There is a monkey puzzle tree to the west of this courtyard.

Two applications WA01/872 and WA01/873 were withdrawn in July 2001 prior to their consideration by the Sub-Committee. (Items B14 and 15 of 18th July 2001 agenda refer). The officers had, however, expressed objection that the two schemes together represented an undesirable subdivision of the site which failed to provide an appropriate contribution of affordable housing. In additional, the scheme for 1 unit represented an inefficient use of the land.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of six two storey dwellings upon the site. These would comprise:-

1. 1 x four bedroomed detached dwelling and a terrace of three (2x2 bed and 1x3 bed) fronting onto Thursley Road. The 4 bedroomed unit would have an attached garage and would be accessed from Thursley Road. The terrace of three would be accessed by a centrally positioned private drive leading to a parking/garage courtyard behind the dwellings.

2. A pair of semi-detached two bedroomed dwellings positioned at the rear and at right angles to the frontage development and accessed from Staceys Meadow (Units 5 and 6).

It is proposed that Units 5 and 6 (the pair of dwellings at the rear) would be offered to a Housing Association as affordable housing in perpetuity to be tied down by legal agreement.

Relevant Policies

Green Belt

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 PE2
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 GB1

AONB/AGLV

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 PE7
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 RE1
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan C3

Rural Settlement Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 RU1
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 RS1
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan RD1

Residential Amenity

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 DE1
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan D1 and D4

Environmental Protection and Trees

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 PE10
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 DE1
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan - D1, D4 and D7

Housing (mix, density and affordable)

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 - HS2
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan - H4 and H5

Main Planning Issues

The main issues in respect of this proposal are compliance with rural settlement and housing policies; impact upon residential and visual amenity (including trees), and highway considerations. The expired approval WA93/1276 is a material consideration in this assessment.

Rural Settlement Policy

• The site lies within the defined settlement of Elstead. Adopted and emerging policies indicate that the principle of new housing development can be acceptable providing that it is substantially surrounded by other development and well related in scale to existing development.

• The principle of development upon this site is acceptable. This scheme is considered to comply with the criteria of RD1. Moreover, the previous permission (WA93/1279), albeit expired, approved 5 dwellings upon the frontage.

• The loss of the garage/commercial use has therefore previously been established. There have not been any material changes in planning circumstances since this previous permission to indicate that a different decision should now be taken to the principle of housing on this site.

Housing Policies

• Policy H4 of the Replacement Local Plan requires that schemes of greater than 3 units should provide 50% of one and two bedroomed units, 80% one, two or three bedroomed units, no more than 20% units be greater than 165sqm (excluding garages) and net densities should be within the range of 30-50 dph.

• The scheme would provide 66% two bedroomed and 83% 2 and 3 bedroomed units.

• No more than 20% of dwellings would exceed 165sqm.

• The proposal would result in a density of some 46 dph which is within the recommended density range. As such proposal accords with Policy H4.

• Policy H5 of the Replacement Plan requires that where density exceeds 40dph, a minimum contribution of 25% of affordable housing will be required. The proposal offers 33% of the dwellings as affordable and therefore makes a significant contribution over the minimum threshold.

Impact upon residential amenity

• Policies DE1 of the adopted local plan and D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan require that development should not result in any material effect upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

• The concerns of local residents regarding loss of light and noise and disturbance from use of the rear access road are noted.

• However, having regard to the juxta position with adjacent development, it would be difficult to sustain a reason for refusal on grounds of loss of light. Moreover, whilst the proposed rear access would introduce vehicular movements across Staceys Meadow which currently do not happen, members should be aware that the previous permission WA93/1276 permitted access for five dwellings on this site across Staceys Meadow and from that point of view this proposal represents a benefit in planning terms.

• The residents preference for all dwellings to be accessed from Thursley Road would meet with a firm objection from the County Highway Authority due to the resultant proximity of two full estate street access points.

Impact from visual amenity and streetscene

• The officers main concern in respect of this proposal is in respect of the design and layout. Policy PE10 of the Structure Plan requires positive protection and enhancement of the urban streetscene. This proposal would, in the officers’ view, fail to enhance the visual quality of the streetscene. The breach of frontage by the central access would result in a weakening of the streetscape. The resultant layout, produces an excess of hardsurfacing and is considered to represent an overdevelopment of the site.

• Notwithstanding the concerns of residents regarding increased use of the Staceys Meadows access, the officer's preference would be for six dwellings upon the frontage accessed from the rear (consistent with the form of WA93/1276).

• The close proximity of plots 5 and 6 to the boundary tree screen would produce an unsatisfactorily dark living environment and, in the opinion of the Tree and Landscape Officer, would increase pressures to lop or fell.

Highway considerations

• The current layout is acceptable to the County Highway Authority subject to conditions. However, any increase in dwelling numbers accessed by the new central access would meet with opposition (contrary to Surrey Design Guide).

Conclusions

In the officer's view, many aspects of this proposal are to be commended. The scheme would produce a generous proportion of affordable housing and smaller units for the village.

However, the scheme does not meet the high standards of urban design envisaged by adopted and emerging local plan policies, PPG3 and the Elstead Village Design Guide. A resubmission would be welcomed offering a stronger, more coherent solution for this important frontage, consistent with Glebe Cottages. However, it is considered that this proposal should be refused.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:-

1. Standard R2.15 Out of Keeping omit “buildings” insert “proposal”.

2. Standard juxtaposition of trees to development R3.4.


5.2 Site Inspection Arising from this Site Committee Meeting

In the event of site inspections being necessary as a result of consideration of the applications before this meeting, these will be held on Thursday, 24th January 2002.

6. Applications for Planning Permission

To consider the reports at Schedules B and C attached. Plans and letters of representation, etc., will be available for inspection before the meeting.

7. PLANNING APPEALS

7.1 Appeals Decisions

The Council has been notified of the following appeal decisions:-

Background Papers

Letters from the Planning Inspectorate dated 5th, 10th, 20th and 28th December 2001.

7.2 Inquiry Arrangements
Background Papers

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

8. ENFORCEMENT ACTION - CURRENT SITUATION

The current situation in respect of enforcement and related action previously authorised is set out below:-

(a) Majorland Rew, Godalming Road, Loxhill, Hascombe (19.6.96 and 20.8.97)

To secure cessation of the use of the land for the stationing of residential caravans and as a contractor’s depot. Enforcement Notices served taking effect 14.11.97. Further Notices served relating to the barn, mobile home, playhouse and other matters. Appeals lodged. Dismissed.

Notice varied to allow retention of barn. Time for compliance expires 16.7.00 for most things. Letter clarifying compliance requirements sent. Planning application received and position on site being monitored. Residential accommodation position being clarified. Letter of offer sent to occupants, who have asked Council to pursue possibility of housing accommodation. Offer of Council accommodation refused. It is not clear if the family will be nominated for a three bedroom house in Dunsfold Housing Association development in 2002.

(b) Gochers Yard, Culmer Hill, Witley (11.3.98)

To secure cessation of the use of land adjoining Gochers Yard, Witley for commercial purposes and the removal of the unauthorised extension to the existing building. Notice in respect of extension served. Appeal lodged. New retrospective application to retain building received. Appeal be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the application. New application refused at the Sub-Committee meeting on 12th September. Appeal. Site visit held. Decision received. Notice quashed. S78 appeal dismissed. Decision being considered by Head of Legal Services.

(c) Croft Nursery, Hookley Lane, Elstead (15.12.99)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised storage use on the site together with removal of the stored items. Enforcement Notice issued and an appeal lodged. Enforcement Notice appeal dismissed, but notice varied to exclude dwellings. Enforcement Notice (as amended) upheld. Lawful Development Certificate appeal dismissed. Award of costs to the Council in respect of ground (d) of enforcement appeal and whole of costs in respect of Lawful Development Certificate appeal. High Court challenge withdrawn, costs paid, Notices come into effect 19.8.01. Correspondence with owner regarding scrap on site. Witness statement being prepared.

(d) Marsh Farm, Station Lane, Enton, Witley (8.2.00)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised storage and industrial uses of the site and removal of the stored items and any other items of equipment used in connection with the unauthorised uses. Enforcement notices issued and appeal lodged. Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part. Car repair required to cease and building C and silos adjacent to buildings E, F and G to be demolished by 29th November 2001. Certain buildings allowed for storage use until 31st December 2003. If fishing development implemented, building J to be demolished.

(e) Weymead, 106 Meadrow, Godalming (5.4.00)

To secure the removal of a sign undesirable and inappropriate by reason of its size, design, illumination and prominence within the streetscene. Owner notified of intention to prosecute and final requests to remove sign. Firm has now left the premises and prosecution papers will be prepared.

(f) Park Avenue, Peper Harow (24.5.00)

To secure the removal of the two unauthorised glazed extensions. Enforcement Notice served taking effect on 30th September 2000. Appeal against Enforcement Notice dismissed and Enforcement Notice upheld
(g) Croft Nursery, Hookley Lane, Elstead (21.6.00)

To secure the demolition of the unauthorised timber building and the removal of any demolition materials from the site; the cessation of the use of the additional haulage area, removal of the hard standing and restoration of the land to grass and, the cessation of the material change of use of the site from a use by three rigid lorries to a use by six lorries and three trailers. Retrospective application for timber building refused at meeting on 16th August 2000. Enforcement Notices served on 5th July 2001 taking effect on 17th August 2001. Compliance date six months. Appeal lodged, Inquiry set for 19th February 2002.

(h) Fairfield Autos, Gochers Yard, Witley (16.8.00)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised use of buildings for car repairs, servicing and maintenance. Certificate of Lawfulness application refused at January 2001 meeting. Notice quashed. Head of Legal Services considering decision.

(i) 18 King’s Road, Farncombe (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of use of the land and buildings, including the carport building and new timber shed, for the storage of builder’s materials, rubble or any other associated non-domestic paraphernalia, including any office facility; the removal of the timber cladding which has been attached to the previously existing carport building and, the removal of the timber shed which has been erected between the carport and the house. Enforcement Notice served taking effect on 12th May 2001. Part compliance apart from timber shed. Retrospective application for remainder invited. No application yet received. Further reminder to be sent.

(j) The Applestore, Foxbury, Upper Vann Lane, Hambledon (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of self-contained habitable use of ‘The Applestore’ and reversion to use as storage and garaging ancillary to Foxbury; the removal of all fixtures and fittings associated with self-containment; the demolition of the extensions, alterations and roof to the water tank and, the removal of all demolition materials from the site. Enforcement notices have been served taking effect on 29th August, 2001. Compliance date six months. Appeals lodged. Awaiting site visit.

(k) Heath Hall Farm, Bowlhead Green, Thursley (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of the use of the front barn building for storage purposes unconnected with the agricultural holding and, the removal of the new agricultural building (cattle building) at the rear. Enforcement notice served on 26th June, to take effect on 26th July, 2001. Compliance date 26th January 2002. Appeal lodged and Informal Hearing held 18th December 2001. Decision awaited.

(l) Wareham Brickworks, Haslemere Road, Brook (17.1.01)

To secure the cessation of the use of the land for the stationing of any mobile homes or caravans and vehicles or equipment connected with this use and also remove the articulated lorry trailer and, legal proceedings or an injunction be sought to secure the removal of the mobile homes or caravans and other items of residential occupation and the prevention of further mobile homes/caravans or other unauthorised structures being brought on to the land. Injunction proceedings to be heard in the High Court on 29th October 2001. Enforcement notice served. An application against the Inspector’s decision on appeal to refuse permission is to be heard in the High Court on 18th December 2001.

(m) Cooper Clarke, Catteshall Lane, Godalming (23.5.01)

To secure the cessation of the breach of conditions. Correspondence with the owners who have indicated that they intend complying with conditions. Situation is being monitored.

(n) Rockwood, Haslemere Road, Brook (18.7.01)

To secure the permanent removal of the extensions to the swimming pool building. Legal interests being established.

(o) 6 Hydestile Cottages, Hambledon Road, Hambledon

To secure the removal of the carport extension. Legal interests are being established.

(p) 45 Birch Road, Farncombe (12.12.01)

To secure the removal of the balcony which has been erected at the first floor of the rear elevation of the chalet bungalow. Legal interests are being established.

Background Papers (CEx)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

9. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public of which notice has been given in accordance with Standing Order 43.

10. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

To consider the following recommendation on the motion of the Chairman:-

Recommendation

That pursuant to Standing Order 48(4) and in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the items, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information (as defined by Section 100I of the Act) of the description specified in the following paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:-

Item 11

Any instructions to Counsel and any opinion of Counsel (whether or not in connection with any proceedings) and any advice received, information obtained or action to be taken in connection with:-

(a) any legal proceedings by or against the authority; or

(b) the determination of any matter affecting the authority

(whether, in either case, proceedings have been commenced or are in contemplation). (Paragraph 12)

11. LEGAL ADVICE

To consider any legal advice relating to any applications in the agenda.


For further information or assistance, please telephone Jean Radley, Senior Committee Secretary on extension 3400 or 01483 523400
CENTRAL 60
SCHEDULE ‘B’ TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
16TH JANUARY 2002

Applications where the considerations involved are clearly defined.
B.1WA01/2046
R Marney
19.10.01
Siting of a caravan for occupation by an agricultural worker for a temporary period at Old Wareham Brickworks, Haslemere Road, Brook, Godalming
Grid Reference:E: 493056 N: 137604
Parish:Witley
Ward:Witley
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV outside settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:Environment Agency not yet received – to be reported orally
Parish Council:Objection – spurious grounds – refer to previous application
Consultations:Environmental Health
Concerned regarding potential contamination – recommend contamination condition and Environment Agency consulted.
Bruton Knowles, Agricultural Consultants
See report.
English Nature
• proposal not likely to have impact on adjacent SSSI;
• concerned about effect on ancient woodland and habitat disturbance.
Representations:8 letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:
1. contrary to Green Belt policy;
      2. contrary to Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty policy;
      3. contrary to terms of previous appeal decisions;
      4. no expectations that any condition imposed would be kept to;
      5. existing use is unauthorised;
      6. attempt again to exploit weak planning regulations.

Relevant History

HM/R 15886Tipping of excess building materials in disused clay workings
Permitted
19.09.66
P43/19/19Enforcement action requiring the cessation of the use of the land for the storage of portaloos, portakabins, trailer, brick containers, corrugated huts, scaffold tack and equipment stored thereon and builder’s equipment and materials
Issued
13.03.86
Notice took effect on
18.04.86
Notice complied with
WA90/1438Siting of mobile home for a temporary period of two years (County matter)

Enforcement action by the County Council to secure the removal of the mobile home on the site



Enforcement action by the County Council to secure the cessation of the use of the site for the operation of a skip hire business
Objection raised
29.10.90

Enforcement Notice
issued on
14.12.90
Appeal Dismissed
23.01.92

Enforcement Notice
issued on
14.12.90
Appeal Dismissed
23.01.92
WA90/1995Change of use of land to private gypsy caravan site
Refused
06.02.91
Appeal Dismissed
23.01.92
P43/19/28Enforcement action requiring the removal of a mobile home, caravan and other structures
Resolved to Issue
04.02.91
Appeal Dismissed
23.01.92
WA92/1496Application for temporary permission for the retention of caravans on the site for three years
Resolved to determine
16.12.92
Applicant applied for
judicial review of
decision
WA93/0334Siting of office/storage shed for duration of tipping operations
Deemed Consent
04.06.93
WA94/0326Retention of two mobile homes for a temporary period
Refused
13.05.94
WA95/1557Variation of Condition 3 of WA93/0334 to allow the retention of office/storage shed until 30.11.96
Deemed Consent
27.02.96

WA00/1626Siting of a mobile home for an agricultural worker for a temporary period
Refused
18.01.02

Following the dismissal of appeals on 23rd January 1992, the owner was prosecuted, convicted and fined in the Guildford Magistrates’ Court. There was a request, however, to adjourn sentence pending the outcome of a judicial review of the non-determination of application WA92/1496. The Magistrates refused to adjourn sentencing and the owner applied to “state a case” to the High Court. Before this was heard, the Council applied to the High Court for an Injunction to remove the mobile homes/caravans from the site. This was granted and the mobile homes/caravans were subsequently removed.

The Site

The former Wareham Brickworks site lies on the east side of the A286, about half a mile to the south of Brook. The site has been restored and comprises a gently sloping site with an area of woodland. It extends to 5.06 ha.

The site contains two mobile homes sited to the southern end, one occupied by the applicant, his wife and two daughters and one occupied by his mother. In addition, an articulated lorry trailer is stationed on the site together with two mobile cabins. The cabins are used as a shelter for chickens that are currently stocked on the land. The applicant moved back to the site in August 2000.

The Proposal

The application seeks permission for the retention of one caravan on the land to provide accommodation for an agricultural worker for a temporary period of three years.

Submissions in Support

In support of the application, the applicant has appointed an agricultural consultant. The consultant’s report states:

“2.2 Mr Marney has already established a 500 bird free-range poultry unit and is well on target to expand the unit to the proposed number of 2,000 free-range and barn birds. The eggs are almost all sold locally at the current time. Some surplus eggs may be sold to the wholesale market in the future. This is only expected to be a small percentage of production.

2.3 The amount of research carried out by Mr Marney prior to the start of the development of the unit, together with the well thought out business plan, make this unit stand out from many others. As does Mr Marney’s previous extensive experience in egg production and marketing.

Once fully established, the unit should return a net farm income of over 18,000 per annum. Although, if the current trend in egg price and profitability continues, it is likely that this profit ceiling will be surpassed. This means that the farm currently satisfies the financial criteria for a temporary dwelling in PPG7, Annexe 1, and should, in the future, satisfy the more stringent tests applied when considering the building of a permanent dwelling.


2.4 The unit should easily provide employment for at least one person full-time.

2.5 For the reasons set out in Section 5, I consider that it is essential that a person resides on the unit full-time and conclude that the unit will meet the functional criteria laid down in PPG7, Annexe 1.

2.6 PPG7, Annexe 1, sets out certain criteria that must be met in order for a temporary dwelling to be approved. The criteria are:

(a) Clear evidence of a firm intention and ability to develop the enterprise concerned (significant investment in new farm buildings is often a good indication of intentions).

There seems to be little dispute that Mr Marney has a firm intention to develop this enterprise. It is quite clear from his circumstances that he needs to make the unit work. He has invested substantial capital and has plans to invest more.

(b) Functional need.

Section 5 of this report refers in planning terms to the functional need to live on the unit. All the available information points to the fact that it is essential for the proper functioning of the unit that someone is available to respond to emergencies at all times.

(c) Clear evidence that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis.

The unit is in the infancy of its development. Approximately 500 birds are on site. Mr Marney has carefully researched his market before going into free-range/barn egg production. In addition, his marketing expertise has resulted in a rapid expansion of the egg sales and the bird numbers. He has put together a very comprehensive business plan. He is now fully on course to achieve the objectives set by this plan. The dedication and the professionalism with which Mr Marney has proceeded with this venture means that there should be no doubt that the unit has been planned on a sound financial basis.

(d) The functional need could not be fulfilled by another dwelling on the unit, or any other existing accommodation, which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned.

Mr Marney has been involved in egg production before; during the years he was involved, he proved to himself that he needed to be on site, no other dwelling exists on the site that could fulfil the proven need.

(e) Other normal planning requirements, for example, on siting and access, are satisfied. It is understood that, in this case, PPG7 is the overriding policy and all of the planning policies flow from this. The access is good and it is considered that the current siting of the mobile home is the least sensitive in terms of visual impact.


Key Planning Issue

The key planning issue is considered to be as follows:

Whether, having regard to the advice in PPG7, there is any justification to allow temporary residential accommodation on the site as proposed in conflict with the normal restriction against residential development in the Metropolitan Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value.

Planning Considerations

PPG7 in Annexe 1 states that one of the few circumstances in which isolated residential development in the countryside may be justified is when accommodation is required to enable farm or forestry workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work.

The PPG goes on to state that, normally, it will be convenient for such workers to live in nearby towns or villages. It does recognise that there may, however, be cases where it is essential for workers to be resident on site. In such an eventuality, the dwelling should normally be provided, for the first three years, by a caravan. The following criteria should also be met:

(a) clear evidence of a firm intention and ability to develop the enterprise concerned (significant investment in new farm buildings is often a good indication of intentions);

(b) functional need;

(c) clear evidence that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis;

(d) the functional need could not be fulfilled by another dwelling on the unit or any other existing accommodation in the area which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned; and

(e) other normal planning requirements, for example, on siting and access, are satisfied”.

In connection with these criteria, advice has been sought from the Council’s appointed agricultural consultants, Bruton Knowles. The report that has been prepared concludes as follows:

6.0 “Conclusion and opinions

6.1 Annexe 1 to PPG7 requires that certain criteria must be met to justify a temporary agricultural dwelling.

6.2 These criteria are set out at Annexe I14 and are repeated below with our comments on them in this case:


6.3 Having taken all the above into consideration, the criteria of Annexe I14 of PPG7 are not met”.

Government advice is that proposals for agricultural dwellings should be scrutinised thoroughly with the aim of detecting attempts to abuse the concession that the planning system makes for such dwellings. There is concern that the physical or financial advantages of a new house in the countryside may be the prime aim with such proposals.

Given the previous planning history of this site, where the current applicant has previously sought to reside on the site as a gypsy, there is considerable concern that this proposal may not be a genuine attempt to establish a viable agricultural unit but more a device to justify a dwelling in the Green Belt and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This concern is supported by the findings of Bruton Knowles. It is not considered that the applicant has clearly demonstrated a firm intention and ability to develop the agricultural enterprise.

It is considered therefore that the proposal conflicts with advice in PPG7 and that the proposal is contrary to Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value policies.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:


1. The site is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the proposed development conflicts with the policies which relate to such areas. In particular, the proposed development conflicts with Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy GB1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan. The development represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would materially harm its visual amenity and openness. The development is not required to meet the essential needs of agriculture or forestry in accordance with the criteria set out in Planning Policy Guidance No. 7 “The Countryside – Environmental Quality and Economic and Social Development”.

2. The site lies in the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the proposal conflicts with the policies for the control of development in such areas, as set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan Replacement Plan 1994, Policy RE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan.

3. The site lies in an Area of Great Landscape Value and the proposal conflicts with the policies for the control of development in such areas, as set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan Replacement Plan 1994, Policy RE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan.
* * * * *

B.2WA01/1785
Wates Homes
15.09.01
Construction of a vehicular access point and erection of fencing and gate, land to the rear of 10 & 11 The Hydons, Hydestile, Godalming (as amplified by letter dated 23.11.01)
Grid Reference:E: 496927 N: 140301
Parish:Hambledon
Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon & Hascombe
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV. Outside of settlement area – Replacement Local Plan. Tree Preservation Order No. 37/99.
Highway Authority:Recommends conditions
Drainage Authority:Comment – No objection to this proposal provided that the pipe is of no less than as shown as 450 mm diameter. The pipe should be laid to fall with each end protected by suitable headwalls. The comments of the Environment Agency are not thought necessary for this application.
Parish Council:“Whilst it is accepted that this revised application conforms to the County Highway Authority’s minimum requirements for sight lines, the Parish Council maintains its objections in all other respects to this revised application. Use of this access and of the Hambledon Road by the large vehicles and substantial machinery that will be required for grass cutting will inevitably by hazardous: the road is narrow, carries a

considerable volume of traffic and is accessed on the other side by a number of families with small children. The Parish Council also remains concerned at the loss of mature hedgerow that would still result (new planting is no substitute). Finally, it reiterates the points made previously, concerning the precedent that would be set by the granting of this application and that the need for an access from the Western Field should have been foreseen at the time the original development was allowed.”
Representations:Original - Two letters have been received, commenting and objecting on grounds as follows:
1. paddocks rear of 9, 10, 11 & 12 originally one paddock with one access from Hambledon Road, at No.12;
2. access now impossible from The Hydons due to buildings and landscaping;
3. concerned whether No.9 would continue to use No.12 access if new access constructed;
4. now confirmed that No.9 would also use new access;
5. would create extremely dangerous hazard, potential for a very serious accident;
6. potential for access from estate itself – more secure and prevent potential illegal trespass by “travellers”, etc.
    Further Three further letters including one signed by five other households have been received since previous committee consideration, commenting and objecting on additional grounds as follows:
      7. the fields have been maintained thus far using existing access – no need for access;
      8. if only to be used 4 times a year and no roadway to be put in, acceptable, but suspicions it will not be just for that;
      9. will saplings be removed? (they will eventually block view from Dunscombe Cottages);
      10. area should remain as rural and undeveloped as possible;
      11. disturbance to deer and other wildlife;
      12. will pave way for applicant to apply for planning for other things such as housing, rural development, etc.
      Relevant History

      WA94/0744Outline application for development of 26 dwellings with landscaping, internal roads, a bridleway and ancillary facilities.
      Refused
      30.09.94

      WA96/0824Outline application for the erection of 16 dwellings following demolition of all existing buildings
      Permitted
      04.10.96
      WA97/0955Erection of five detached dwellings and garages
      Permitted
      07.04.98
      Subject to Legal Agreement
      WA00/1564Construction of a vehicular access point and erection of gates
      Refused
      09.11.00

      Description of Site/Background

      The Proposal

      Full permission is sought for the creation of a new vehicular access off the Hambledon Road, to fields west of Nos. 10 and 11 The Hydons and for the erection of associated fencing and a gate. The access would serve both Nos. 10 and 11; No. 10 directly, No. 11 by way of a 3 m wide, 17 m long fenced “corridor” running from the access to the north.

      Submissions in Support

      The agent writes in support of the revised scheme as follows:

      Relevant Policies

      The relevant policies are:

      Green Belt – Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan, Policy GB1 of the Local Plan 1993 and Policy C1 of the Replacement Local Plan
      Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value – Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan, Policy RE1 of the Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 Replacement Local Plan
      Environmental implications – Policy DE1 of the Local Plan 1993, Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Replacement Local Plan
      Highways considerations – Policy MV8 of the Local Plan and Policy MT2 of the Replacement Local Plan.

      Main Planning Issues

      The site lies within the Green Belt countryside. The proposal for a new access represents inappropriate development which is, by definition, harmful to the openness of the Green Belt. Very special circumstances must be shown to exist to justify a setting aside of the strict policies of restraint.

      Planning permission was refused in November 2000 (WA00/1564 refers) for an access to serve this land. Concerns at that time related to adverse impact upon highway safety and the character of the area. The current proposal differs significantly from the earlier scheme. In particular:- the proposed access has been moved to the south and, following the results of a speed survey and a site meeting, including a representative of the Highway Authority, highway safety concerns have now been overcome;
      the access width has now been reduced from 6 – 13 m wide with two separate gates to a single timber farm gate entrance of 4 m wide;
      unnecessary “urban” features – involving brick headwalls and tarmac surfacing at the drain crossover – are now omitted in favour of a rolled limestone hoggin surface; and
      furthermore, the revised siting would cut through a narrower section of sparser hedgerow, minimising vegetation loss. (a) the proposal is considered necessary by the applicants in order to enable vehicular access on to the land to maintain the paddock use of land (individual accesses were not formed to this land at the time of redevelopment);
      (b) (c) the applicants confirm that legal access will be granted to No. 9 to reach their field / paddock via the new access if permission is granted;
      (d) access from the existing roads within The Hydons development is constrained by formalisation of these gardens, together with the existing trees and “new” landscaping belt;
      (e) Hambledon Road is a classified road with a speed limit of 60 mph;
      (f) the County Highway Authority considers the proposal acceptable;
      (g) use of the fields, to which the access would serve, is restricted by a legal agreement (attached to planning permission WA97/0955) to agriculture, Green Belt or paddocks only;
      (h) whilst a section of hedge adjacent to Hambledon Road would be removed, given the residential access almost opposite, the proposal is considered to satisfactorily conserve and enhance visual amenity;
      (i) the proposed timber gate and low wire mesh fencing (to match the existing) would be in keeping with the predominantly rural character of the area;
      (j) given that the existing access would continue to serve No. 12 and confirmation that that proposed would be shared by remaining Nos. 9, 10 and 11 The Hydons, it is not considered that an unacceptable precedent for multiple accesses would be set by a grant of permission in this case. whilst the concerns for impacts to wildlife are noted, in officers’ opinion no material harm would to result to wildlife as a result of this proposal;
      any future applications for development of any kind, upon the paddock lands to which access is currently proposed, would be treated on its own merits, in light of relevant policies, including those protecting the Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value.

      Conclusions

      Recommendation

      That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

      1. Standard new access (H5) 2. The drainage ditch pipe shall be of a diameter of no less than 450 mm as indicated upon the drawings hereby approved. 3. 4. Standard landscape scheme (25.9) 5. Standard landscape works implementation (25.10) 6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of all proposed external surface finishes shall have been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority. All works shall be carried out in strict accordance with these agreed details.

      Reasons

      1. To satisfy Policy MT2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994 2. To satisfy drainage requirements and to accord with Policy D12 of the Replacement Local Plan
      Informative

      1. Standard HF13 – The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out works on the highway. The applicant is advised that a licence must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway. 2. The applicant is advised that the development hereby permitted is accepted on the understanding that the vehicular access from Hambledon Road would be shared for maintenance access purposes by Nos. 9, 10 and 11 The Hydons.
      * * * * *
      B.3WA01/2112
      Mr & Mrs Cartwright
      02. 11.01
      Erection of an outbuilding to provide ancillary storage (revision of WA01/1050), Whinfold, Hascombe Road, Godalming.
      Grid Reference:E: 499345 N: 140310
      Parish:Busbridge
      Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon & Hascombe
      Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV. Outside settlement – Replacement Local Plan
      Highway Authority:No requirements
      Drainage Authority:No requirements
      Parish Council:Not yet received – to be reported orally
      Consultations:Appraisal from Bruton Knowles – see report
      Representations:One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:
      1. Building still in same unacceptable location – revision from original proposal insignificant;

      2. Proximity to boundary would compromise views from adjacent house (particularly in winter);
      3. Noise generation;
      4. Alternative location suggested;
      5. Do not dispute need for garden storage.
      Relevant History

      WA90/0107Erection of garage for four vehicles with storage area in roof.
      Permitted
      23.04.90
      WA96/1108Change of use of garage / store to provide accommodation ancillary to the main house together with alteration to elevation
      Permitted
      19.09.96
      WA96/1115Erection of extensions and alterations
      Permitted
      19.09.96
      WA97/0433Erection of a tennis court fence
      Permitted
      21.04.97
      WA98/1693Erection of extensions and alterations
      Permitted
      15.12.98
      WA01/1050Erection of outbuilding to provide gardener’s store
      Refused
      16.08.01

      Description of Site/Background

      Whinfold is a large detached residential property, set in garden land (approximately 0.8 ha) and woodland (3.3 ha), totalling around 5.7 ha. The dwelling is situated on the southern side of Heath Road (B2130), within a countryside location characterised by sporadic residential development. Existing outbuildings on the site include a garage with accommodation above, an existing open fronted timber framed storage building, a greenhouse and a further timber framed building. Planning permission was refused in August 2001 for a barn-style outbuilding on account of its excessive size for intended uses (reference WA01/1050 refers).

      The Proposal

      Permission is sought for the erection of a barn-style outbuilding, as a re-submission of WA01/1050. The building would measure 35.05 sq m in area, to an eaves height of 2.2 m and ridge height of 5.2 m.

      The building is proposed to provide storage for garden machinery used to maintain the grounds, together with a side tool store.


      Submissions in Support

      “The enclosed drawings show a smaller scheme compared to the refused application with a reduction in floor space from 45.5 sq m to 35.05 sq m.

      …You confirmed that the Bruton Knowles’ report only considered the need for the outbuilding in terms of land management purposes. It did not consider the need for secure storage our clients’ garden furniture. Hence the Bruton Knowles’ guideline should be treated as a minimum, not a maximum, in order to take account of the additional storage requirement. As this is a material consideration in the determination of this application we respectfully submit that the additional 5 sq m is acceptable in terms of your Council’s policies and, in any event, will not have any adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt.”

      Relevant Policies

      Green Belt – Policy PE2 Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy GB1 Adopted Local Plan 1993, Policy C1 Replacement Local Plan Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value – PE7 Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy RE1 Adopted Local Plan, Policy C3 Replacement Local Plan Main Planning Issues
      The Council’s agricultural/land management consultants have carried out an appraisal of the site and the need for the new building and have concluded that:
      Having regard to the comments of the Council’s consultants set out above, and the removal of an existing timber building, officers consider that a satisfactory justification has been made for the provision of this smaller building within the Green Belt.


      Recommendation

      That permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:

      1. Standard approval of materials (4.4) 2. The ancillary outbuilding hereby permitted shall be retained as such and kept available at all times for the purposes of domestic storage only. 3. Prior to the first use of the outbuilding hereby permitted, the existing store building, to the south of the dwelling, shall be demolished and all demolition materials removed from the site. 4. The store building hereby permitted shall at no time be used as habitable accommodation.

      Reasons

      1. Standard RC4 (visual amenity) (PE7) (SE6) (RE1) (C3)

      * * * * *
      B.4WA01/2291
      Mr & Mrs Lapworth
      30.11.01
      Erection of extensions at 8 Parkfield, Godalming
      Grid Reference:E: 497454 N: 142734
      Town:Godalming
      Ward:Godalming South-east
      Development Plan:No site specific policy – within developed area
      Highway Authority:No requirements
      Drainage Authority:Not yet received – to be reported orally
      Town Council:No objection
      Representations:Two letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:
          1. inadequate separation to No. 11 Chestnut Way (at rear);
          2. inconsistent with low density character of estate;
          3. already light pollution from No. 8 and No. 6 Parkfield;
          4. noise generation from No. 8;
          5. loss of privacy;
          6. effect on property value;

          7. exceeds 10% increase in size allowed in law;
          8. request Members’ site visit;
          9. overlooking and loss of privacy;
      10. query use of sheds in garden.

      Description of Site/Background

      No. 8 is a two-storey detached dwelling situated on the south side of Parkfield. The rear garden adjoins those of Nos. 9 and 11 Chestnut Way. The property has an existing attached single garage.

      The Proposal

      Permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage and the erection of part two-storey, part single-story side and rear extensions measuring a total of some 97 sq m in floor area. The extensions would provide a porch, w.c, replacement garage, utility room, study, kitchen and dining room at ground floor and two further bedrooms and shower/w.c. over. The side extension would be separated by 700mm sq m from the common boundary with No. 9. It would project by 1.4 m to the front of the dwelling in the form of a subordinate gable extension. The single-storey extension would extend across the entirety of the rear and project by 2.4 m to a height of 3.5 m.

      Relevant Policies

      Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – PE10

      Waverley Local Plan 1993 – DE1

      Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – D1 and D4

      Main Planning Issues

      The site is located within the Godalming Developed Area. The principle of residential extensions is acceptable subject to their impact upon residential and visual amenity. The following are material considerations.

      Impact upon Neighbouring Amenity

      • The concerns of neighbouring occupiers are noted.

      • However, having regard to the absence of any windows on the side of No. 9 and the separation distances involved, there would not be any material loss of light caused to neighbouring occupiers.

      Impact upon Visual Amenity and Streetscene

      • The proposed extension would project forward of the existing building line and would convey a bulkier appearance than the existing design.

      • However, the front projection is set at a lower level than the existing ridge line which, on balance, conveys a satisfactorily subordinate appearance.


      • It is noted that similar side extensions have recently been added to two dwellings on the north side of Parkfield.

      • Having regard to the presumption in favour of extensions within the developed area, it is considered that the proposal should be permitted.

      Recommendation

      That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

      1. Standard obscured glazing (3.8) *(first floor) *(western side)

      2. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(first and ground floor walls) *(western and eastern)

      3. Standard matching materials (4.3)

      Reasons

      1 – 3. Standard (RC11)
      * * * * *
      B.5WA01/1780
      Guildford Hockey Club
      14.09.01
      Construction of an all-weather artificial grass sports pitch together with the provision of fencing and floodlighting on land at Broadwater School, Summers Road, Farncombe, Godalming (as amended by plans received 4.1.02 and amplified by plans received 4.1.02)
      Grid Reference:E: 498441 N: 145716
      Town:Godalming
      Ward:Godalming North East and South West
      Development Plan:MGB. Outside Developed area – Replacement Local Plan.
      Highway Authority:No requirements
      Drainage Authority:Environment Agency – No objection, in principle. Recommends conditions.
      Town Council:No objection
      Consultations:Guildford Borough Council – In conclusion, there are no objections to the proposal provided that:
      1. The proposal accords with Waverley Borough Local Plan policy;
      2. There is no viable alternative location on which to site the pitch;
      3. The hours of illumination of the floodlighting are controlled;
      4. All works to trees are undertaken in accordance with British Standards 3998 (1989) ‘Recommendations for tree work’;
      5. The comments of the Environment Agency are adhered to;
      6. The Highways Authority do not to object to the proposal.
      Representations:41 letters have been received in total. 36 are in support of the proposal as follows:
      1. Extra provision for hockey a bonus to locality;
      2. Rodborough facilities limited;
      3. Waverley BC support essential, for the community;
      4. All junior clubs in Surrey have moved from grass to Astroturf pitches;
      5. Lack of available pitch is limiting ability to participate more in Surrey youth development programme;
      6. Hockey is a sport open to all;
      7. Ask the Planning Committee to support this application;
      8. Numbers playing hockey are growing;
      9. Need an artificial pitch to remain competitive;
      10. Little doubt that there is insufficient provision for the needs of the area;
      11. Existing sand pitch encouraged Club to move from Woodbridge Road to Broadwater in preference to Park Barn, within Guildford Borough;
      12. Rugby Club wish to be assured, by Local Planning Authority and the Environment Agency, that the increased rate of surface water run off created by the artificial pitch will not impact on existing Rugby facilities downstream of proposal site;
      13. Refer to the ‘Waverley Leisure Needs for Godalming Study’ – this application should be part of the strategy for sport/leisure use in Godalming.
        5 letters comment/object on the following grounds:
        1. Question need for another pitch – existing pitch not in use all of the time, need is not justified;
        2. Broadwater School may have further plans to expand their sport facilities – need a co-ordinated overall plan;
        3. May lead to over-development within residential area – larger plan, applied for in piecemeal fashion;
        4. Light pollution from flood-lighting – anymore totally unacceptable, cumulative effects of lighting;
        5. Pitch will be easily visible from Summers Road;
        6. Floodlighting a distraction to motorists;
        7. Use of ‘close perimeter’, latest technology lighting would reduce the objection – could this be insisted upon for all floodlighting in the area;
        8. Traffic flow has increased dramatically in recent years;
        9. Fencing and floodlighting will be intrusive to visitors to Garden of Remembrance;
            10. Noise nuisance to local residents from pitch and traffic generated;
            11. Increasing uncertainty regarding Broadwater Park and undisclosed master plan by Parklife Limited;
            12. Residents’ quality of life under serious threat from sporting and leisure facilities, already at saturation point;
            13. The earlier application was refused;
            14. Summers Road a ‘rat run’ after traffic calming in Furze Lane;
            15. Pitch would not be of use for soccer and rugby;
        16. Effect on neighbours, wildlife and food chain.

        Relevant History

        WA93/1633Construction of dual use artificial pitch with fencing, floodlighting and additional car parking.
        Permitted
        26.01.94
        WA94/0892Erection of sports pavilion of 545 sq m together with ancillary works
        Permitted
        18.08.94
        WA96/0678Refurbishment of tennis courts to provide multi-sports arena together with fencing and floodlights
        Permitted
        01.08.96
        WA96/0961Erection of a sports pavilion, alterations to site access and other ancillary works.
        Permitted
        19.09.96
        (imple-
        mented in
        1998)
        WA98/0493Provision of an artificial grass pitch with fencing and floodlighting; extension of existing artificial pitch.
        Refused
        22.05.98
        WA98/1075Extension of existing artificial pitch.
        Permitted
        10.09.98

        Description of Site/Background

        The application site lies to the immediate north-east of the Broadwater School main buildings, off Summers Road. This 0.64 hectare site is an existing grass playing field. The land in question is generally flat, apart from a slight slope towards the north east where a stream abuts the site boundary. Trees bound the Summers Road (north-west) and, to a lesser extent, north-east site boundaries.

        The site forms part also of Broadwater School, which is also used by a variety of sports and other clubs for example the South West Surrey Youth Orchestra, Guildford and Godalming Rugby Clubs and various netball and football clubs.
        Planning permission was refused in May 1998 for a new artificial pitch with fencing and floodlighting, together with an extension to an existing artificial grass pitch (the latter approved under WA98/1075). The new pitch was resisted on the grounds of conflict with Green Belt policies (presumption against such development); that the floodlighting would pay insufficient regard to existing features of the site and would materially detract from the character and amenity of the area; and would be close to and adversely affect a watercourse.

        The Proposal

        Planning permission is sought for the erection of an additional artificial grass pitch, measuring 101.44 m in length by 62.86 m in width, together with associated fencing and floodlighting. The pitch would be finished in green polypropylene, sand-filled artificial grass. The proposed fencing would be 3 m high, with 5 m high sections for a 24 m width behind the goals, of weld mesh, timber striker boards.

        Floodlighting is required for winter months, in order that Sport England funding may be obtained. This would comprise eight, 15 m high lighting columns, bearing a total of 24 lamps. To achieve a level pitch, some cut and fill may be needed along the north-east boundary.

        It is indicated that a second pitch is required because of increasing demand for floodlit leisure facilities; demand for improved artificial pitches; and due to the success of Guildford Hockey Club.

        In comparison with the previous refusal WA98/0493, the current proposal differs in the following way:

        Submissions in Support


        In support of the proposal, the agent writes in the Planning Statement that:-

        Relevant Policies

        The following policies are relevant to this proposal:-

        Green Belt – Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 (Green Belt), Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy GB1 of the Adopted Local Plan 1993, and Policy C1 of the Replacement Local Plan; Environmental Impact– Policy DE1 of the Adopted Local Plan 1993, Policy E1 Supplementary Planning Guidance, Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan; Impact upon trees – Policy C7 of the Replacement Local Plan; Highway safety – Policy MT2 of the Surrey Structure Plan, MV8 of the Adopted Local Plan, Policies M1 and M2 Replacement Local Plan; Sport and Recreation - Planning Policy Guidance Note (Sport and Recreation), TL5 Adopted Local Plan, LT8 (Sports Grounds and Playing Fields) Replacement Local Plan.

        Main Planning Issues

        Planning Considerations
        Recommendation

        That the application be referred to the Development Control Committee as a departure from the adopted plan and that the Area Sub-Committee recommends that, subject to:
        permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:-

        Reasons
        * * * * *
        B.6WA01/1841
        Mr and Mrs Steward
        26.09.01
        Construction of dormer windows for loft conversion at The Birches, Wildcroft Wood, Witley (as amended by letter dated 6.12.01 and plans received 7.12.01)
        Grid Reference:E: 493914 N: 140506
        Parish:Witley
        Ward:Witley
        Development Plan:MGB, AONB – Within defined settlement area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements

        Parish Council:Original scheme
        Objection – Out of character and over development
        Amended scheme
        Objection - Out of character and over development
        Representations:Original scheme
        One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:-
            1. overlooking – value private rear garden;
            2. contrary to AONB;
            3. would change bungalow to a house;
            4. noise and traffic (parking problems) during construction;
            5. if granted, preference for dormer windows to front and velux at the rear.

        Description of Site/Background

        The Birches is a gable-ended bungalow situated on the south side of Wildcroft Wood, off Gasden Lane. Ground levels fall across the cul-de-sac, from south to north, such that The Birches and the two neighbouring bungalows (Madeley and Twin Trees) lie at a higher level than those on the opposite side. A larger, wooded, garden of a property in Keswick Road abuts the application site on its southern boundary.

        The Proposal

        Planning permission is sought for the erection of:-

        Relevant Policies

        The relevant policies are:-

        Environmental Impact


        Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

        Green Belt

        Main Planning Issues

        The property lies within the defined settlement area of Witley, wherein the principle of extensions to existing dwellings may be acceptable subject to their impact upon visual and residential amenity. In its original form, the scheme involved a larger dormer window at the rear and clear glazed gable end window which would have caused overlooking.

        The following factors are material considerations:-

        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:-

        Reasons
        * * * * *
        B.7WA01/2268
        Mr Stevens
        28.11.01
        Erection of a first floor extension at Hillview, Catteshall Lane, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 498412 N: 144245
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming South East
        Development Plan:No site specific policies within developed area Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No comment
        Town Council:Not yet available - to be reported orally
        Representations:1 letter has been received raising objection on the following grounds:-
        1. overshadow neighbour
        2. overlooking
        3. loss of light due to proximity and height

        Site Description/Background

        Hillview, a semi-detached house, is situated on the north western side of Catteshall Lane almost opposite The Old Cider House.

        The Proposal

        The proposal is to add a first floor extension of 8.8 sqm above an existing bathroom to the rear of the dwelling. The extension would extend to the rear by 3.3m and would extend to a full two storeys in height. The boundary with the adjoining half of the semi-detached pair is situated 3m to the south west and the dwelling adjoining to the north east would be 4m away.

        Relevant Policies

        The site lies in the developed area therefore the relevant policies are:-

        Structure Plan 1994 - Policy PE10
        Local Plan 1993 - Policy DE1
        Replacement Local Plan - Policy D1 and D4


        Main Planning Issues

        The planning issue is:-

        whether the proposed extension would materially harm the amenity of neighbouring occupier and the character of this area.

        In respect of neighbours' amenity it is considered that the proposal would not have a material impact. The separation distance to the adjoining dwelling is considered to be sufficient to ensure that there would not any material loss of sunlight or daylight. Additionally, it is considered that the extension would not appear over-dominant.

        The extension, being situated to the rear of the dwelling, would not be readily visible to the public and would not materially impact on the character of the area. It would be constructed with a pitched roof in keeping with the existing dwelling.

        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

        2. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(ground or first floor) *( north east and south west facing elevations)

        Reasons

        1 & 2 Standard (RC11)
        * * * * *
        B.8WA01/2093
        29.10.01
        Mr & Mrs Williams
        Erection of extensions and alterations, 16 Minster Road, Godalming (as amplified and amended by letter dated 19.12.01 and 20.12.01 and amended by plans received 21.12.01)
        Grid Reference:E: 497047 N: 142542
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming South East
        Development Plan:No site specific policy. Within developed area – Replacement Local Plan.
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:Objection, considered to be over-development and shows lack of harmony with No. 18 Minster Road.

        Relevant Nearby History (to adjoining No. 18)

        WA93/0045Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of existing single storey extension, No. 18 Minster Road
        Permitted
        05.03.93
        WA01/2053Erection of a single storey extension, No. 18 Minster RoadPermitted
        05.12.01

        Description of Site/Background

        No. 16 is a semi-detached, two-storey dwelling, situated on the southern side of Minster Road. The immediate area is residential in character, comprising a mix of house styles, many of which have been extended (including adjoining No. 18 and next door No.14).

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of single and two-storey extensions as follows:

        Two-storey, side and rear extension, after demolition of an existing single-storey section of the building – measuring up to 9.5 m in length by 2.1 m in width, would result in a net enlargement of the property of 58.35 sq m; to provide an enlarged breakfast/family room plus utility and w.c. on the ground floor, with master bedroom, bathroom and en-suite bathroom above.

        Single-storey, rear extension, abutting extension recently approved to adjoining No. 18 Minster Road (WA01/2053 refers) – measuring 3.45 m in width by 3.6 m in depth, would add a 12.42 sq m kitchen.

        The proposals would together result in an enlargement of 70.77 sq m.

        Submissions in Support

        In a supporting letter, dated 24.10.01, the applicant writes that:

        “Whilst many properties within the locality of the property have benefited from alterations and extension of varying extents, No. 16 Minster Road has remained largely untouched since original construction. The application proposes a family home in keeping with the original design, providing extended accommodation that balances reception areas and bedrooms.

        This application should be seen in conjunction with a current application by our immediate neighbours, Mr & Mrs Porrill of 18 Minster Road, Godalming. It is our joint intentions to build upon the boundary line to the rear of our properties.”

        Relevant Policies

        Environmental Implications – Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994; Policy DE1 of the Adopted Local Plan; and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Main Planning Issues

        The site lies within the developed area of Godalming, where extensions to existing dwellings are, in principle, acceptable subject to their impact in terms of visual and residential amenity.


        In making these assessments, the following are material considerations:

        No. 16 Minster Road occupies a lengthy plot and has not previously been extended;
        Whilst substantial in size, the proposed extensions have been designed to minimise impact upon the street-scene; by setting the side extension down in height and stepping it back from the front elevation of the building. Officers consider that the proposals are appropriate in scale and design to the building;
        Having regard to development in the immediate area, and, in particular, to cumulative extensions (built and approved) to adjoining No. 18, the proposal would be in keeping with the character of the locality;
        Whilst the concerns of the Town Council, regarding over-development, are acknowledged, in light of the above comments the proposal should not be resisted on this ground;
        The Town Council also refer to a lack of harmony between No. 16 and No. 18 Minster Road. Whilst the design of the side extensions would vary, that to No. 18 was added some years ago and, given the mix of styles in the area, the proposed approach for No. 16 is considered acceptable. In particular, the set back and 0.8 m separation from the boundary would avoid a ‘terracing’ effect with No. 14 and would ensure that the extensions remain subordinate to the main building.
        The effects upon adjacent occupiers have also been reduced by stepping down the rear extension to single-storey at the shared boundary with No. 18. No material harm would result to residential amenity in terms of loss of light, over-dominance or overlooking.

        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

        2. Standard No New Windows (11.3) *(walls) *(first floor, east and west elevations of the hereby permitted extensions)

        3. A safety railing shall be provided around the first floor French windows, serving the master bedroom on the rear elevation, and thereafter maintained, as indicated on the approved plans.

        4. At no time shall the roof area (over the new kitchen) be enclosed or used as an extended balcony or first floor roof terrace area.

        5. Standard obscured glazing (3.8) *(first floor, side master bedroom) *(east and west elevations)

        Reasons

        1. Standard (RC4) (visual amenity) (PE10) (SE3) (DE1) (D1 and D4)
        2-5. Standard (RC9) (overlooking of adjoining properties) (DE1) (D1 and D4)
        * * * * *
        B.9WA01/2055
        Mr Hilgers and Mrs Hood
        24.10.01
        Erection of a two-storey extension, 29 Marshall Road, Godalming (as amended by plans received 02.01.02 and 04.01.02)
        B.10WA01/2056
        Mr Hilgers and Mrs Hood
        24.10.01
        Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a two-storey extension and internal alterations, 29 Marshall Road, Godalming (as amended by plans received 02.01.02 and 04.01.02)
        Grid Reference:E: 497459 N: 144867
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming North East and South West
        Development Plan:No site specific policy. Within settlement area – Replacement Local Plan. Grade II listed building
        Highway Authority:WA01/2055 & 2056 – No requirements
        Drainage Authority:WA01/2055 & 2056 – No requirements
        Town Council:WA01/2055
        The Town Council considers the proposed extension will be out of keeping with the local environment.
        WA01/2056
        Objection (see WA01/2055)
        Representations:One letter has been received, objecting on grounds as follows:
            1. Impact upon health/appearance of Indian Bean Tree;
            2. Two-storey extension to two-storey listed building excessive;
            3. Single-storey would be less obtrusive;
            4. No. 29 is semi-detached – would throw whole building out of balance;
            5. Apart from restoration work, not in favour of alterations to original design of a listed building.
        Description of Site/Background

        No. 29 is a semi-detached, two-storey property, occupying a prominent position on the corner of Marshall Road and Lower Manor Road. The property fronts Marshall Road, facing the mainline railway. The area is predominantly residential in character.

        The Proposal

        WA01/2055 seeks planning permission for the erection of a two-storey extension to the south side of the property. Measuring 2.9 m in width by 3.9 m in depth, the extension would enlarge the property by 22.62 sq m, providing a utility and w.c. on the ground floor with a bathroom and cupboard over.

        WA01/2056 seeks Listed Building Consent for the erection of the same extension and for internal alterations, including a reconfiguration of the first floor layout at the head of the stairs and by the kitchen and breakfast room on the ground floor.


        Submissions in Support

        In a justification statement, the agent writes:-
        Relevant Policies

        The relevant policies are:-

        Main Planning Issues

        The application site lies within the developed area of Godalming, wherein the principle of extensions may be acceptable, subject to considerations of their impact upon visual and local residential amenity and in this case, the effects of the proposed works on the character and integrity of this Grade II listed building.

        The following are material considerations:

        • Officers are satisfied that the proposed works to this listed building are justified, in terms of the removal of unsuitable existing facilities within the main house
        Recommendation

        WA01/2055 – That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

        Reasons

        WA01/2056 – That Listed Building Consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:


        Reasons
        * * * * *
        B.11WA01/2285
        Mr and Mrs Coleman
        03.12.01
        Erection of extensions and alterations at 3 Parkfield, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 497532 N: 142737
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming South East
        Development Plan:No site specific policy - within developed area - Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:Not yet received - to be reported orally
        Representations:7 letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:-
        1. out of keeping with original design of estate
        2. extension on 17/19 Parkfield is ugly
        3. loss of property value
        4. owners should have purchased a larger house
            5. permission would mean more inconvenience by building work
            6. would contribute to general deterioration of Busbridge area
            7. Would disturb underground drainage
            8. Loss of open spacious atmosphere
            9. Visually intrusive
            10. Excess bulk and massing
            11. Loss of light
            12. Unclear in respect of structural reinforcements to garage and compliance with building regulations
            13. Drainage problems
            14. Tile hanging is unacceptable
            15. Overlooking and loss of privacy of properties in Parkfield and Chestnut Way
            16. Noise and disturbance
            17. Terracing effect would be caused
            18. Effect on and finish to remainder of garage to No. 4

        Relevant History

        WA01/1307Erection of two storey and single storey extensions
        Withdrawn
        16.8.01


        Description of Site/Background

        No. 3 Parkfield is one of a pair of symmetrical link-detached two storey properties on the west side of the cul-de-sac. The dwellings are linked by their attached single garages which are positioned adjacent to each other between the houses.

        An earlier planning application WA01/1307 was withdrawn prior to its consideration by the Sub-Committee (item B17 of July 2001 agenda). The officers had recommended refusal on grounds that the extensions would have appeared overly dominant and led to loss of light and amenity to the occupiers of Nos 2 and 4 Parkfield.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of a part single storey/part two storey side and rear extension following demolition of the existing garage.

        The extensions would measure a total of some 52 sqm in floor area and provide a family room, utility room lobby and replacement single garage at ground floor with a bedroom and bathroom over. The ground floor extension would project 2.1m from the rear of the existing house but the first floor addition would be inset by 800m at the rear and 600mm at the front from the existing walls.

        The extensions would be separated by 900mm from the common boundary with No. 4 Parkfield.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 - PE10
        Waverley Local Plan 1993 - DE1
        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan D1 and D4

        Main Planning Issues

        The site is located within the Godalming Developed Area. The principle of residential extensions is acceptable subject to their impact upon residential and visual amenity.

        The following are material considerations:

        Comparisons with Previous Scheme WA01/1307

        In comparison with the withdrawn scheme the following changes have been made:-

        a) The floorspace has been reduced by some 40sqm.
        b) The ridge line of the extensions has been lowered by 350mm.
        c) The extensions have been separated from the boundary by 900mm.
        d) The side facing window has been omitted.
        e) The two storey addition has been restricted to between the existing front and rear walls.


        Impact upon Neighbouring Amenity

        Having regard to the omission of the rear two storey projection and side facing windows proposed previously, the proposal would not cause any material loss of amenity to neighbouring occupiers.

        The objections raised by neighbouring occupiers in respect of overlooking and loss of light have been noted. However having regard to the generous separation distances involved, such objections cannot be reasonably sustained.

        Impact upon Visual Amenity and Streetscene

        Parkfield was originally planned and built in a fairly homogenous style, typical of 1960s/1970s developments. However, the residents' preference that this uniformity should be preserved intact, cannot in the officer’s view be sustained. This is not a Conservation Area nor is the area, pleasant though it appears, worthy of such strict preservation, in planning terms. Local Plan Policies allow extensions within urban areas providing that their design is satisfactory and amenity is not harmed. This revised proposal has incorporated a vernacular style with lowered ridge line and inset walls. It appears satisfactorily subservient. The separation distance is sufficient to avoid any subsequent terracing effect. The proposal would not in the officers’ view cause harm to the extent that permission should be refused.

        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

        2. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(first floor) *(side elevations)

        3. Prior to the commencement of works on site, details shall first be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority of the finished treatment of the side of the existing garage to No. 4, following works of demolition of the garage No. 3.

        4. Prior to the occupation of the extension hereby permitted the existing garage shown to be demolished shall first be removed and all demolition materials removed from the site.

        Reasons

        1-4. Standard (RC11)
        * * * * *


        B.12WA01/1124
        Fitness First Plc
        05.06.01
        Display of an illuminated sign to rear elevation at Fitness First, 48 – 52 High Street, Godalming
        B.13WA01/2168
        Fitness First Plc
        09.11.01
        Display of an illuminated sign at Fitness First, 48 – 52 High Street, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 497077 N: 143890
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming South East
        Development Plan:Within developed area, Town Centre Area, Conservation Area, Site of Archaeological Potential
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:WA01/1124
        Object – illumination unnecessary. Not in keeping with existing signage on same building.
        WA01/2168
        No objection.
        Representations:WA01/2168
        One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:
        1. sign will shine northwards;
        2. visually intrusive;
        3. visible to north side of Lammas Lands;
        4. excessive size and height;
        5. out of keeping;
        6. add to already high light pollution;
        7. if granted, should be switched off at midnight.

        Relevant History

        WA99/0969Change of use of part of ground floor and first floor from Class A1 (retail) to Class D2 (assembly and leisure) to provide a health and fitness centre together with external alterations
        Permitted
        06.08.99
        WA00/1226Display of illuminated signs
        (front of building)
        Consent Refused
        14.09.00
        WA01/0982Consent to display an illuminated sign
        Consent Granted
        9.07.01

        Description of Site/Background

        “Fitness First” is an exercise club which occupies the upper central section of 48 – 52 High Street (the former “Waitrose” site). It is flanked on either side by “Weatherspoons” and “The Parisa Bar” (now “The Slug and Lettuce”).


        The main public entrance to the premises is on the High Street. Members will recall that prosecution action was agreed to secure the relocation and reduction of an illuminated sign on the front elevation. Compliance was subsequently achieved and the unauthorised sign and lights removed. The rear of this building adjoins Crown Court Car Park and is a prominent elevation in views as far as Lammas Lands and Frith Hill.

        The Proposal

        Two applications for advertisement consent have been received in respect of signage for the rear elevation of the buildings:

        WA01/1124

        Consent is sought for the display of an externally illuminated sign. It would measure 1.86 m in length, 1.4 m in width and be positioned 3.8 m above ground level to the underside of the sign. The sign would read “Fitness First ENTRANCE ON HIGH STREET” and comprise blue and red individual acrylic letters in accordance with corporate identity. It would be lit by a trough-light above.

        WA01/2168

        Consent is sought for the display of an externally illuminated sign. It would measure 2 m in length, 1 m in width and be positioned 2.6 m above ground level to the underside of the sign. The individual letters would be constructed in silver stainless steel and would be illuminated by a strip trough-light above.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE10 and PE12

        Waverley Local Plan 1993 – Policies DE12, C11 and DE1

        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies D10, HE8, D1 and D4

        Main Planning Issues

        • The site is located within the Town Centre Area and Conservation Area. Whilst the vitality and viability of existing businesses are encouraged, policies require that the character and appearance of the Conservation Area are preserved or enhanced.

        • The principle issue in relation to the proposed signs is the effect upon the Conservation Area and their visual impact generally.

        • The officers doubt the necessity for a sign on this exposed elevation at all. Whilst it is desirable for commercial premises to promote themselves as far as possible, this is not the main entrance. The sign would act as an advertisement for the business rather than a demarcation of a main entrance.

        • This is an important elevation and, whilst a modern building, it is a landmark within the Conservation Area viewed from wider distances. The officers consider it desirable to minimise advertisement clutter on this building in the interests of protecting the character of the Conservation Area.


        WA01/1124

        This sign is considered to appear unduly intrusive placed at an inappropriate level, out of keeping with other fascia level signage. The Town Council’s objection is shared by the officers.

        WA01/2168

        Whilst considered an improvement over WA01/1124, this sign would appear as an untidy distraction which would create unnecessary clutter on this important elevation, to the material harm of the Conservation Area.

        Recommendation

        B.12 WA01/1124

        That subject to the expiry of neighbour notification period of 24.1.02 and consideration of representations received in that period then Advertisement Consent be REFUSED for the following reasons:

        1. Standard Conservation Area (R10.5) *(height, size, materials, siting, design, illumination and position) *(Town Centre Conservation Area)

        2. Standard Streetscene (R10.2) *(height, size, materials, siting and position)

        B.13 WA01/2168

        That subject to the expiry of neighbour notification period of 24.1.02 and consideration of representations received in that period then Advertisement Consent be REFUSED for the following reasons:

        1. Standard Conservation Area (R10.5) *(height, size, materials, siting, design, illumination and position) *(Town Centre Conservation Area)

        2. Standard Streetscene (R10.2) *(height, size, materials, siting and position)
        * * * * *

        B.14WA01/2127
        Mr Barnsby
        05.11.01
        Erection of a single-storey extension at 2 Silo Road, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 497724 N: 145645
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming North
        Development Plan:No site specific policy – within developed area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:No objection

        Representations:One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:
        1. overshadowing;
        2. loss of light;
        3. flat roof or lower pitch is preferable;
        4. excessive length;
        5. unreasonable sense of enclosure.

        Description of Site/Background

        No. 2 is a two-storey detached property situated on the west side of Silo Road in Farncombe. To the south are other properties fronting Silo Road of similar size and design to No. 2. The northern boundary adjoins the gardens of properties fronting Furze Lane.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of a pitched roof, single-storey rear extension measuring 20 sq m in floor area, to an eaves height of 2.6 m and ridge height of 3.7 m. The extension would extend 5 m in depth within the rear garden and be separated by 1.3 m and 1.8 m from the common boundaries with No. 4 to the south and those to the north respectively.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policy PE10

        Waverley Local Plan 1993 – Policy DE1

        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies D1 and D4

        Main Planning Issues

        The site is located within the developed area of Farncombe wherein the principle of extensions is acceptable subject to amenity considerations. The main issues are therefore the acceptability of the proposal in terms of:

        (a) visual appearance; and

        (b) amenities of adjacent residential occupiers.

        • The extension would not be visible from within the streetscene. Although at 5 m, its length would be fairly generous, the plot is of considerable depth and this would not be viewed as an overdevelopment from adjacent properties.

        • The concerns of the neighbouring occupier have been noted. The upper part and roof of the extension would be likely to be visible to those occupiers above the boundary fence of 1.6 m. However, the extension would be separated by some 6 m from the rear of No. 21 Furze Lane. Having regard to the slope of that roof away from that property and the separation distance, the officers consider that there would be no material loss of light or outlook to those or and other residential occupiers.


        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

        2. Standard obscured glazing (3.8)

        3. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(ground floor) *(flank elevations)

        Reasons

        1-3. Standard (RC11)
        * * * * *
        B.15WA01/2254
        Mr Vourlakidis
        26.11.01
        Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of existing garage, Pine Beck, Haslemere Road, Milford (as amended by letter dated 14.12.01 and plans received 14.12.01).
        Grid Reference:E: 494370 N: 141711
        Parish:Witley
        Ward:Milford
        Development Plan:MGB. Within settlement area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Parish Council:Original scheme
        Objection – out of character in relation to surrounding properties. The Parish Council objects to the continuing trend to attempt to distort upwards the mix of modest properties in the settlement area.
        Amended scheme
        Not yet received – to be reported orally
        RepresentationsOne letter received in support of the scheme as follows:
        1. the proposed use of roof space is acceptable;
        2. immediate neighbours (Redroofs) have converted roof space;
        3. whole proposal, including better use of attached garage represents a pleasing design.

        Description of Site/Background

        Pinebeck is a two-storey, detached dwelling situated just within the settlement of Milford and facing Milford Heath (across the Haslemere Road).

        The Proposal

        Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two-storey side extension, following demolition of an existing attached single garage. The total enlargement in
        Submissions in Support

        In support of the revised scheme, the agent writes that:

        “We have altered the proposals in the following manner:-

        1. We have omitted the loft conversion, together with the front and rear dormers.
        2. The side extension has been stepped back at ground and first floor by 500 mm. This maintains the subservient character of the extension.
        3. The window at first floor in the gable wall has been omitted. Therefore, omitting the overlooking element.”

        Relevant Policies

        Green Belt – Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan, Policy GB1 of the Adopted Local Plan and Policy C1 of the Replacement Local Plan;

        Environmental Implications – Policy PE10 of the Structure Plan, Policy DE1 of the Local Plan and Polices D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Main Planning Issues

        In its original form the scheme included a loft conversion with front and rear dormer windows. This application is brought before Committee following receipt of an objection from the Parish Council to the original proposal. The comments of the Parish Council are awaited in respect of the revised scheme.

        The site lies within the settlement area, wherein the principle of extensions may be acceptable, subject to their impact upon visual and residential amenity.

        In this respect, the following are material considerations:

        The side extension would be subordinate to the main house, having a 0.5 m set back from the front main wall and a 0.2 m lower ridge line;
        The proposal is considered to be in keeping in scale and design with the property, its plot and the mixed character of property styles within the surrounding area;
        At its nearest point, the extension would be 2 m from the shared side boundary with Heath View;
        Whilst the side outlook of neighbouring Heath View would be altered, it is considered that the proposal would not adversely affect the amenity of these occupiers by reason of over-dominance, over-shadowing or privacy loss.
        The officers consider that in respect of the extent of the proposals, the Parish Council's objection has been overcome by the amended proposal. It is considered that the scheme should now be supported.


        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3) 2. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(first floor level, wall) *(south-west side)

        Reasons

        1. Standard (RC4) *(visual amenity) (PE10) (SE3) (DE1) (D1 and D4) 2. Standard RC6 *(overlooking of adjacent properties) (DE1) (D1 and D4)
        * * * * *
        B.16WA01/2040
        Palace Estates Ltd
        22.10.01
        Erection of a two storey extension to provide offices following demolition of existing single storey offices (revision of WA00/1892), Guardian House, Borough Road, Godalming
        B.17WA01/2041
        Palace Estates Ltd
        22.10.01
        Application for Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of existing single storey offices, Guardian House, Borough Road, Godalming.
        Grid Reference:E: 496761 N: 144156
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming North East and South West
        Development Plan:Conservation Area, Area of Suitably Located Industrial and Commercial Land, Area of Strategic Visual Importance, Flooding Area, Footpath Ref 1:573, Tree Preservation Order WA204. Within developed area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:WA01/2040 – Recommends conditions
        WA01/2041 – No requirements
        Rights of Way Officer – no objection but recommend signs warning drivers of pedestrians and no obstructions to footpath
        Drainage Authority:WA01/2040 & /2041 – Environment Agency - not yet received – to be reported orally
        Town Council:WA01/2040 – No objection
        WA01/2041 – No objection subject to agreement of Waverley Borough Council’s Historical Buildings Officer.
        Representations:Four letters have been received, including one from the Frith Hill Area Residents’ Association, in respect of WA01/2040, objecting on the following grounds:
        1. would not allow for long established, historic, right of way to footbridge over River Wey;
        2. larger offices would create more traffic and parking, making footpath hazardous;
        3. why is it proposed to rebuild on a site that was badly flooded last year?

        4. site notices were poorly placed;
        5. present ingress / egress extremely dangerous, concealed, and no warning sign, high speeds;
        6. drivers would not be aware of pedestrians in car park;
        7. loss of public amenity and safety;
        8. no provision for delivery vehicles;
        9. request conditions to protect path users;
        surprised entrance to move closer to rail bridge.

        Relevant History

        WA91/1561Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of part of existing building
        Refused 11.02.92
        WA91/1562Application for Conservation Area Consent for demolition of part of existing building and erection of an extension
        Refused 07.01.92
        WA97/0101Alterations to elevations
        Permitted 03.03.97
        WA00/1892Erection of a two storey extension of approx. 866 sq m to provide offices following demolition of existing single storey offices
        Withdrawn
        29.01.01
        WA00/1893Application for Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of existing single storey offices
        Withdrawn
        29.01.01

        Description of Site/Background

        This 0.28 hectare site is located within a triangle of land bounded by Borough Road to the east, the River Wey to the south and a railway embankment to the north-west. The site comprises a 1960s two storey office building with a circular single storey outshot to the south. Planning permission and Conservation Area Consent applications for a two storey extension and demolition of exsiting extension were withdrawn prior to their determination. The officers' concerns at the time were however that the proposal would be prone to flooding and harmful to the Area of Strategic Visual Importance and Conservation Area.

        The Proposal

        Planning permission, under reference WA01/2040, is sought to demolish part of the existing offices and to replace them with a new two storey building. The proposal would result in an increase of floor area of 387 sq m (from 287 sq m to 674 sq m). The proposed replacement building would be at the southern end of the site. These applications are revisions of the scheme considered last year.


        The current proposal differs from the earlier scheme as follows:

        the proposed new office floor space has been reduced, from 866 sq m to 674 sq m;
        the bulk and massing of the proposed extension has been reduced and the roof shape simplified;
        the maximum height of the extension is reduced from 9.35 m to 8.2 m;
        the width of the two storey link to the existing main building has been increased and the depth of the extension accordingly reduced,
        some consequent reduction in scale, design and extent of fenestration, including omission of first floor balcony dormer feature to south (riverside) elevation.
        In support of the revised proposal, the agent writes that:

        “…You will recall that the Environment Agency objected to the proposal on the grounds of footprint area. I enclose my letter to them of 15th March 2001 together with the relevant drawing and their reply of 5th April 2001 approving the proposed footprint. This latest proposal reflects that footprint.

        In essence this proposal reflects the previous to a reduced scale. The Ground Floor slab is above the 1968 flood level, the floor plan is reduced and the roof height is below the existing office ridge. Car parking is as before and therefore, with the reduced floor area, an improvement.

        These proposals now satisfy the previous objections and I trust will receive your recommendation for approval”.

        Relevant Policies Environmental Impact – Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy DE1 of the Adopted Local Plan, and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Conservation Area – Policy PE12 of the Structure Plan, Policy C11 of Local Plan, and Policy HE8 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Area of Strategic Visual Importance – Policy RE2 of the Local Plan and Policy C5 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Area of Suitably Located Industrial and Commercial Land - Policy EM3 of the Local Plan and Policies IC2 and IC4 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Flooding Area - Policy SE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan Deposit Draft 2001, Policy and D12 of the Replacement Local Plan. (1) Flooding The proposed development has been repositioned further away from the watercourse but would still result in a significant increase in the amount of building on the site, on the river side.
        Some pre-application discussion took place between the agent and the Environment Agency. The revised scheme now features a greater separation between the development and the river, again with metal louvres within the base brick plinth to facilitate the free flow of flood water.
        The comments of the Environment Agency are awaited and will be orally reported to the meeting. (2) Area of Strategic Visual Importance The site is designated an Area of Strategic Visual Importance, within which it is proposed to introduce a significant increase in the mass and scale of building on this site.
        Efforts have been made to reduce the bulk and massing of the building, in comparison with the previous proposal, and on balance, it is considered that the impacts upon the openness of this area are now reduced in comparison with the previous scheme. (3) Conservation Area

        Furthermore, the site forms a part of the Conservation Area. Whilst it is accepted that the building to be demolished has no significant architectural or historic interest, the scale of the proposal is such, that it would increase the prominence of development on the site.
        It is therefore crucial that a good design is achieved, in order that redevelopment preserves or enhances the character of this part of the Conservation Area.
        The scheme in its present form would not satisfactorily preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area.

        (4) Design

        Whilst the size of the proposal has been reduced, relative to the previous scheme, officers remain concerned about the design and scale of the extension and its appropriateness to this sensitive site.
        It is considered that the proposal remains visually bulky and fails to address the shape and informality of the riverbank.
        The opportunity to improve the elevations of the existing main building has also been missed; improvements could include changes to windows and rendering of the brickwork.

        Recommendation

        WA01/2040 - that permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

        1. Standard ASVI (R 1.7)*(Godalming) 2. Standard Conservation Area (R 6.3) 3. The proposal by reason of its design and scale would be of detriment to this sensitive area and would conflict with the intention of the Local Planning Authority to protect and enhance the visual character of the settlement, contrary to Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan. 4. Any appropriate drainage reasons. 1. Standard Demolition Prior to Redevelopment Scheme (R 6.1).

        * * * * *
        B.18WA01/2154
        Mr & Mrs Rhodes
        09.11.01
        Retention and alterations to existing barn at Watersmeet, Vann Lane, Hambledon, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 496967 N: 138257
        Parish:Hambledon
        Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon and Hascombe
        Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV outside settlement - Replacement Local Plan, Site of High Archaeological Potential
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Parish Council:“The Certificate of Lawful Use in respect of Watersmeet refers to the “purpose built, agricultural barn”. The Parish Council does not appear to have a note of the Council’s decision on WA00/1920 (regarding the continued occupancy of Watersmeet without compliance with the agricultural occupancy condition); but, regardless of that decision, it objects strongly to this retrospective planning application.

        There have already been massive alterations to the house, which may or may not have exceeded the total permitted limit (qv the frequent references in Ian Adam-Smith’s letter of 22nd November 2000, forming part of application WA00/2151, to the many
        extensions that have occurred to the house since it was originally built). The need for sufficient living and storage accommodation, a playroom/gym, an office/study, an ancillary kitchenette and shower room, an extra w.c. and additional shower/changing room facilities for those using the swimming pool should have been addressed by the plans submitted in November 2000. There can be no question of these being provided by the conversion of a barn into what, to all intents and purposes, is a new dwelling; they should all be accommodated within the existing dwelling.

        Watersmeet lies within the Green Belt and the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value. It is also a site of high archaeological potential. The presumption must surely therefore be against any development additional to that permitted by WA00/2151”.
        Consultations:County Archaeologist – No objection
        Representations:Eight letters have been received, six expressing support and two objecting on the following grounds:
            1. contrary to planning laws and reason for control;
            2. extensive alterations and extensions already carried out;
            3. would lead to opening of floodgates;
            4. contrary to Green Belt and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty policies;
            5. may lead to more extensive use;
            6. large size.

        Relevant History

        WA83/1093Erection of a single-storey extension and alterations to provide one additional bathroom, dressing room and garage
        Permitted
        06.12.83
        WA85/0002Erection of a single-storey extension to provide dining room
        Permitted
        19.02.85
        WA85/0994Erection of an extension to provide enlarged lounge
        Refused
        19.11.85
        WA00/2151Construction of dormer windows and alterations to elevations
        Permitted
        30.01.01
        WA00/1920Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness under Section 191 for the continued occupation of dwelling without compliance with agricultural occupancy conditions
        Certificate
        Issued
        12.02.01


        Description of Site/Background

        The application site, which measures 0.014 ha, is located off a driveway leading from Vann Lane to the east of Hambledon. The site is occupied by a chalet bungalow, together with two outbuildings. Historically, this was an agricultural dwelling restricted by occupancy condition. However, a Lawful Development Certificate for non-compliance with the condition was granted in 2001.

        To the east of the house is a single-storey building whose lawful use appears to be an ancillary annexe to the main dwelling. Further to the south-east is a substantial pitched roof barn measuring some 135 sq m in floor area. It measures 4.4 m to the ridge and 2.7 m to the eaves. This is the subject of the current application. Evidence submitted at the time of the Lawful Development Certificate application (WA00/1920) indicates that this building has been used for the storage of vehicles and other domestic paraphernalia to serve the main dwelling. In its original form, it was an open-side cart shed (four bays). The building, in its original form, it is understood, was erected in 1989 without the benefit of planning permission. Public Footpath No. 191 runs to the south of the site and coincides with the driveway to the property for its main east-west stretch.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the retention of alterations in respect of the Barn. The alterations (which were carried out in April 2001) are as follows:

        1. The replacement of the previous corrugated sheeting roof with a cedar shingle roof.

        2. The overcladding of the original shiplap boarding with feather-edged oak boarding on all elevations.

        3. The insertion of eight windows and two doors on the north-west elevation.

        4. The insertion of two first floor windows on the south-west elevation.

        5. The opening up of three bays (by removal of boarding and insertion of posts) on the ground floor south-west elevation to create car port/garage spaces.

        6. The filling in of the existing open front of the south-east elevation with timber boarding.

        7. Internal alterations to the building to form a self-contained residential unit (including kitchenette, shower, w.c, office/study, gym/playroom (but currently laid out as a living room) garden machine store/utility room.

        8. Insertion of two stairwells to access first floor “storage areas”; one of these areas is being used as a bedroom.

        Submissions in Support

        In support of the scheme, the agents have put forward the following main arguments:

        1. Barn was originally constructed in 1989 by previous owners and itself replaced previous buildings on same site.


        2. Original structure has been retained and altered, not rebuilt.

        3. Not all intended works (shown on plan) have yet been carried out.

        4. The building is necessary for domestic storage purposes following loft conversion in main house.

        5. Self-contained facilities are required to serve the office/study/swimming pool to minimise trips necessary to main house.

        6. Residential unit is ancillary to main house.

        7. Works would normally be “p.d.” except for Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty status.

        8. Complies with policy.

        9. Original barn structure is now immune from enforcement action.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE2 and PE7

        Waverley Local Plan 1993 – Policies GB1 and RE1

        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999 – Policies C1 and C3

        Main Planning Issues

        • The site is located within the Green Belt, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of Great Landscape Value.

        • Adopted and emerging policies indicate a strict presumption against inappropriate development.

        • The main planning issues are:

        (a) compliance with Green Belt policy;

        (b) consideration of whether there are very special circumstances;

        (c) impact of alterations upon landscape.

        Green Belt Policy

        • The works which have been carried out represent a form of inappropriate development.

        • Whilst the footprint of the original barn has not been enlarged, its open sided structure has been significantly enclosed resulting in a loss of open rural character.


        • The changes give the former agricultural building a materially more domesticated appearance which is considered to affect the visual amenity of the Green Belt.

        • The creation of a self-contained residential unit is of considerable concern. There would be no physical or functional link with the main dwelling and, having regard to its size on two floors, could give rise to pressures for separate occupation.

        • The applicant’s reasons for carrying out the works do not represent very special circumstances. The fact that the original building did not have planning permission, but is now immune from action, is not considered justification for carrying out further harmful development in relation to it.

        Impact on the Landscape

        • The alterations fail to protect or conserve the natural qualities of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

        • The building is very visible from the adjacent footpath and considered intrusive from it.

        • The alterations result in the building appearing more domesticated and less rural in character. If the original appearance was not desired by the applicants, or indeed by nearby residents, then there would have been no objection to its removal, particularly as it was unauthorised and not erected for genuine agricultural purposes in the first place!

        Recommendation

        That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

        1. Standard Metropolitan Green Belt (outside settlements) (R1.1)

        2. Standard Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (R1.3)

        3. Standard Area of Great Landscape Value (R1.4)

        4. The development which has been carried out in respect of the building represents inappropriate development within the Green Belt. No very special circumstances exist to justify the development. The works appear materially intrusive within the surrounding landscape and represent a form of intensification of habitable accommodation upon this plot to the detriment of the character of this sensitive area. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies PE2 and PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1997, LO6 and SE6 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, GB1 and RE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and C1, C3 and RD3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan.
        * * * * *


        B.19WA01/2298
        Mr A Jeff
        05.12.01
        Erection of an extension and alterations to existing bungalow to provide chalet bungalow at Maybrook, Gasden Lane, Witley (revision of WA01/1464)
        Grid Reference:E: 493832 N: 140656
        Parish:Witley
        Ward:Witley
        Development Plan:MGB, within defined settlement - Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:Not yet received – to be reported orally
        Parish Council:No objection to extension at back. The Parish Council strongly objects to any development upwards as being totally out of keeping with neighbouring properties.

        Relevant History

        WA90/0619Erection of a single-storey rear extension and construction of a pitched roof to bathroom
        Permitted
        12.06.90
        WA01/1464Erection of extensions and alterations to bungalow to provide a chalet bungalow
        Refused
        25.09.01

        Description of Site/Background

        Maybrook is a semi-detached bungalow situated on the north side of Gasden Lane in Witley. There is an existing single-storey conservatory at the rear linked to an outbuilding (shed). The neighbouring semi-detached property “Bluehills” has also been extended at the rear by way of a conservatory.

        Permission was refused under WA01/1464 for extensions and alterations to Maybrook. The Council’s concern was that the extension, by virtue of its first floor gabled nature and balcony, would be overdominant and unneighbourly to occupiers of “Bluehills”.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of a two-storey rear extension measuring some 50 sq m in area following demolition of the existing conservatory and outbuilding. It would provide a kitchen and lounge with study over. The existing roof area would be converted into a bedroom and bathroom with storage within the eaves. The first floor addition would be within the roof area which would align with the ridge of the existing house with a hipped roof. A flat roofed dormer window measuring 1.5m in height by 2.7m in length is also proposed.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policy PE10
        Waverley Local Plan 1993 – Policies RS1 and DE1
        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies RD1, D1 and D4

        Main Planning Issues

        • The main issues are the acceptability of the proposal in terms of residential and visual amenity considerations.

        • The proposal is a resubmission following the refusal of WA01/1464.

        • In comparison with the previous scheme, the following changes have been made:

        (a) a study is now provided within the roof extension rather than a 2nd bedroom as previously;

        (b) a hipped roof is provided replacing the previously shown gable end;

        (c) the previously shown French doors and balcony in the first floor gable end have been omitted;

        (d) an east facing Velux window has been shown to light the roof area.

        • The Parish Council’s concern regarding an ‘upward’ extension is noted. This is the reason why the application has been brought to the Committee.

        • However, the changes that have been introduced, in the officers’ view, have overcome the previously expressed concerns.

        • The ground floor extension would reflect the size of the existing ground floor addition to be demolished.

        • The roof extension would not appear materially out of keeping considering that the existing ridge line would be respected, and the fact that the neighbouring property has itself been altered at the rear. The protection of a symmetrical relationship at the rear is considered to carry very little weight.

        • Finally, the changes have overcome the previous concerns in respect of loss of privacy and dominance by the full hip and omission of the balcony.

        As a result, it is considered that the proposal should be supported as an acceptable and unharmful form of alteration.

        Recommendation

        That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

        1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

        2. The new first floor (roof) extension shall only be used as a study as shown on the submitted plan and for no other use without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

        3. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(roof slope) *(north or west facing)

        4. Standard obscured glazing (3.8) *(proposed roof lights) *(rear facing elevation)

        Reasons

        1. Standard (RC11)

        2. To prevent pressures for the insertion of additional windows which could cause material loss of privacy to the neighbouring occupiers, pursuant to Policy DE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan.

        3&4. Standard (RC11)
        * * * * *
        B.20WA01/1864
        V Rhode
        04.10.01
        Alterations to access and driveway on land adjoining Goodbrook Farm, Vann Lane, Hambledon
        Grid Reference:E: 496621 N: 138276
        Parish:Hambledon
        Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon and Hascombe
        Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV – outside settlement - Replacement Local Plan, Conservation Area
        Highway Authority:Recommend conditions
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Parish Council:No objection

        Relevant History

        WA83/1068Change of use of stable block to livery (Goodbrook Farm)
        Permitted
        23.08.83
        WA97/0982Change of use to dwelling together with the erection of pergola link following the demolition of two outbuildings
        Refused
        18.09.97
        WA98/0711Change of use to dwelling following demolition of two outbuildings (Goodbrook Farm)
        Refused
        19.06.98
        Appeal Allowed
        07.04.99

        Description of Site/Background

        The application site measures some 0.15 hectares and is located on the south side of Vann Lane in Hambledon. The site is occupied by two former stable blocks which were the subject of permission, on appeal, for conversion to a residential unit (WA98/0711 refers). To the south is an extensive range of former agricultural buildings now used for light industrial purposes. These are apparently owned by the applicant’s brother. An independently occupied two-storey dwelling, The Lodge, lies to the north of these buildings. All these sites are served by a narrow existing driveway and access onto Vann Lane.


        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for alterations to the driveway and access as follows:

        1. the driveway would be repositioned some 5 m to the west;

        2. the access would be widened by some 9 m and the shrubbery cleared to give better visibility;

        3. other shrubbery would be cleared to the south to improve visibility;

        4. no details are provided at this stage in relation to levels or surfacing;

        5. the displaced driveway (northern part) would be lifted and removed.

        Submissions in Support

        In support of the proposal, the agent has made the following main points:

        “The principal benefits are:

        1. There will be improved sight lines and turning radius onto Vann Lane for all traffic using this access.

        2. The line of the drive is moved slightly to the west so that it will be a little further from the main wall of The Lodge. This will improve the circumstances of The Lodge.

        3. It provides for a better access to Goodbrook Farm, properly unified with the other vehicular access. It does not require any mature trees to be felled and does not pass closer than 6 m to any mature tree. It does require removal of some laurel undergrowth, which is not an indigenous species. The positions of the mature oak trees have been the subject of a measured survey”.

        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE2, PE7 and PE12

        Waverley Local Plan 1993 – Policies GB1, RE1, C11 and DE1

        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies C1, C3, HE8, D6 and D7

        Main Planning Issues

        • The site is located within the Green Belt outside of any settlement and within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, an Area of Great Landscape Value and the Hambledon Conservation Area.

        • Policies indicate a presumption against development in the interests of protecting the openness of the Green Belt and appearance of the landscape.

        • Development should preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area and trees are protected by virtue of their Conservation Area designation.


        • The main issues are:

        (a) whether the proposal complies with planning policies for the Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value;

        (b) the impact upon trees of amenity value;

        (c) the impact upon residential amenity.

        • The proposal would represent a form of inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

        • Whilst the alterations would improve vehicular visibility, this is not considered to represent very special circumstances to warrant setting aside the normal policies of restraint.

        • The officers, having regard to the specialist advice of the Arboricultural Officer, consider that, on the basis of the information provided, the proposal would cause material harm to valuable trees within the Conservation Area and landscape. In particular, the inadequate distance to important oak trees is of concern.

        • The loss of vegetation and the material widening of the access would have the effect of making the access appear more stark, dominant and suburbanised within this sensitive country lane.

        • Whilst the position of the driveway would be moved further from “The Lodge”, the wider access and improved general visibility would reduce difficulties for industrial traffic from the southern site. This could have the effect of leading to an intensification of use and traffic movements upon the site which would be undesirable from Green Belt, landscape and residential amenity viewpoints.

        Recommendation

        That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

        1. Standard Metropolitan Green Belt (outside settlements) (R1.1)

        2. Standard Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (R1.3)

        3. Standard Area of Great Landscape Value (R1.4)

        4. Standard Intention to Protect and Enhance (R6.3)

        5. Standard Detriment to Character and Amenity (R 2.10) *(PE10 and PE12) *(SE4 and SE7) *(DE1, C11 and RE1) *(C3, D1, D4, D6, D7 and HE8)
        * * * * *


        B.21WA01/2075
        Onslow Homes Plc
        25.10.01
        Erection of a terrace of three new dwellings with parking area and associated works on land between 17 and 21 Farncombe Street, Farncombe, Godalming
        Grid Reference:E: 497540 N: 145000
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming North East and South West
        Development Plan:No site specific policy. Within developed area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:Recommends conditions
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:No objection
        Representations:One letter has been received, commenting as follows:
            1. no objections in principle to proposed development;
            2. concerned regarding drainage between site and O H Hewitt Ltd (No. 21) – if ground level raised above existing damp-course;
            3. rainwater should run from No. 21 into new soakaways.

        Description of Site/Background

        The application site comprises a section of open grassed verge fronting Farncombe Street, at present used to display an advertisement hoarding, and the lower section of the rear garden of No. 11 Owen Road. To the immediate east lies No. 17 (a dwelling) and local shops, whilst a commercial property (No. 21) lies to the west, and the mainline railway beyond. The area is generally characterised by two-storey buildings and occupying a landscaped frontage area.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of an infill terrace of three, two-bedroomed houses, with ridge heights of 9 m. Two of the dwellings would be of 79.7 sq m gross floor area, the third would be 83 sq m (total proposed 242.4 sq m gross floor space). The buildings would be set 4-6 m back from the main building line, behind three parking spaces and bin storage occupying a frontage landscaped area.

        Submissions in Support

        In support of the proposal, the agent writes that:

        “The proposal is to provide three small two-bedroomed terrace houses with parking space at the front, all properly landscaped, the details of which form part of the application. In this respect, we ask you to note three things:


        Relevant Policies

        Environmental Implications

        Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy DE1 of the Adopted Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Housing

        Policy DP8 of the Structure Plan, Policy HS6 of the Local Plan and Policy H4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Main Planning Issues

        The site lies within the developed area of Godalming, wherein infill residential development may be appropriate, subject to considerations of the impact upon visual and residential amenity and on highway safety.

        In this respect, the following points are material considerations:

        • Firstly, having regard to the generally forward position of buildings in the immediate area and the very close proximity of the site to local services and the mainline railway station, a terrace set well back from the building line would appear out of keeping with the character of the area and would contribute little to the street-scene.


        Recommendation

        That permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

        1. Standard Detriment to Character and Amenity (R2.10) *(PE10) *(SE3) *(DE1) *(D1 and D4).
        * * * * *
        B.22WA01/2153
        A J Tracy & Sons Ltd
        31.10.01
        Erection of a detached dwelling with access onto Wood Road (amendment to dwelling approved under WA98/1578 to include the erection of a utility room) on land to the rear of 30 and 32 Bourne Road, Godalming (as amplified by letter dated 20.12.01)
        Grid Reference:E: 497683 N: 145503
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming North
        Development Plan:No site specific policies. Within the developed area – Replacement Local Plan
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:No objection

        Relevant History

        WA98/1578Erection of a detached dwelling with access onto Wood Road
        Permitted
        20.11.98

        Description of Site/Background

        This application relates to a site of 0.03 ha which originally formed part of the rear gardens of Nos. 30 and 32 Bourne Road.

        Planning permission was granted in 1998 for the erection of a single infill dwelling on this site, with access onto Wood Road, and for the provision of replacement car parking to serve existing No. 30 (WA98/1578 refers).

        The development has now been largely completed. However, a single-storey utility room has been constructed to the rear of the garage which was not shown on the approved plan.

        The Proposal

        Permission is sought for the erection of a detached dwelling, of a revised design to that previously permitted. It would include a rear utility room (in accordance with the development as constructed).

        In addition, the present proposal differs from the earlier application in that the two parking spaces previously shown to be provided to serve No. 30 are no longer intended to be provided by this proposal. Whilst they are still shown on the plan, they are now excluded from the application site area.


        Submissions in Support

        In a letter of explanation the applicant writes that:

        “This is to confirm that, when we put in the application, we requested (and it made sense) to apply for permission for a garage and parking for No. 30 Bourne Road adjacent to the new site.

        Unfortunately, after we applied for this permission, 30 Bourne Road was sold very quickly and the new owners were not interested in having the work done and could not afford the costs involved. Subsequently the curbs were not dropped at this junction.

        30 Bourne Road has now changed hands again and therefore there has been no change to the situation.

        I would also like to confirm that, on the present plot (which we have now developed), there were never any garages for parking as all the curbs parallel to the site in Wood Road were at high level.”

        Relevant Policies

        Environmental implications

        Housing

        Policy DP8 of the Structure Plan, Policy HS6 of the Local Plan and Policy H4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Highway safety

        Policy MT2 of the Structure Plan, Policies MV8 and MV9 of the Local Plan and Policy M14 of the Replacement Local Plan.

        Main Planning Issues

        The principle of a new dwelling within the developed area may be acceptable, subject to considerations of the impact on visual and residential amenity and on highway safety. In this case, the appropriateness of an infill dwelling has already been established by the earlier planning permission (WA98/1578 refers). The issues for consideration are therefore the impact of the revised aspects of the development, namely the new utility room and the omission of two car parking spaces to serve No. 30 Bourne Road.

        The following are material considerations:

        • Having regard to the modest scale and pitched roof design of the utility room, and to the adequate rear garden which still remains to serve the new property, the proposal would not prejudice visual amenity in the area.


        • The addition of the single-storey utility room would not, it is considered, result in material harm to the amenity of the occupiers of adjacent No. 1 Wood Road. Moreover, the utility room would not adversely impact on the amenity of these neighbouring occupiers were they to implement an extant permission (WA99/1872 refers) to extend their own property, adjacent to the shared boundary with the application site.

        • Officers are, however, concerned at the omission of car parking for No. 30 Bourne Road from the current application. The earlier permission (WA98/1578) was allowed on the basis that the loss of existing garages serving No. 30 would be compensated by two new parking spaces within the curtilage of that dwelling. A planning condition was imposed to secure such alternative provision.

        • Whilst the applicant’s contention that No. 30 did not in fact use this area for parking is noted, the application was nonetheless acceptable to the County Highway Authority on the basis that on-street parking would not be exacerbated as a result of the development. If no alternative provision is made, the opportunity for No. 30 to park within its own curtilage will have been lost.

        • Having regard to the fact that this alternative parking could not now be secured by a planning condition, were this application to be permitted, officers consider that the revised proposal should be resisted on the grounds of loss of on-site car parking.

        Recommendation

        That permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

        1. Standard Inadequate Car Parking (R12.3) (to read “….the satisfactory parking of vehicles of No. 30 Bourne Road clear of the highway...”)
        * * * * *
        B.23WA01/2019
        Hazel Grove Properties
        12.10.01
        Erection of extensions, alterations and conversion of existing buildings to provide three dwellings (revision of WA01/0438), rear of 7-11 Church Street, Godalming
        B.24WA01/2020
        Hazel Grove Properties
        12.10.01
        Application for Listed Building Consent for extensions and alterations to existing barn and outbuildings to provide three dwellings (revision of WA01/0439), rear of 7-11 Church Street, Godalming.
        Grid Reference:E: 496812 N: 143848
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming South-East
        Development Plan:Within the developed area – Replacement Local Plan; Conservation Area; Area of Archaeological Interest; Grade II Listed Building
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements

        Town Council:WA01/2019 - No objection
        WA01/2020 - No objection subject to the agreement of Waverley Borough Council’s Historical Buildings Officer.
        Consultations:County Archaeologist – Recommends condition
        English Heritage – No objection
        Ancient Monuments Society – “We note the close involvement hitherto in this case by your Conservation Officer and given that the current scheme seems to be based upon his observations we are quite prepared to defer to him”.
        Representations:Four letters received, commenting and objecting on the following grounds:
        1. No objection to development of increasingly dilapidated site;
        2. No parking provision – will worsen already unsatisfactory lack of residents parking facilities in area;
        3. request that first floor toilets and bathrooms overlooking our garden be obscure glazed;
        4. communal pedestrian access onto Mint Street unsatisfactory, dangerous – no pavement, access directly onto main road;
        5. increased noise and disturbance to No. 4 Mint Street;
        6. main access should be into WBC car park via gated entrance;
        7. overlooking from new windows to bedroom and front room of No. 4 Mint Street;
        8. adversely affect visual amenity;
        9. will cause loss of light;
        10. concerned about raising skyline of any of existing building;
        11. refuse bin storage?
        12. application forms inaccurately suggest site not within a Conservation Area;
        13. impact upon character of Listed Building;
        14. assume development will not impact traffic using Mint Street (it is a tight squeeze when cars parked in bays).

        Relevant History

        WA86/1838 Construction of new shop front and fascia (9 Church Street)Permitted
        12.12.86
        WA87/0912Application for Listed Building Consent for alterations to window (9 Church Street)Permitted
        09.06.97
        WA89/1536Display of non-illuminated hanging sign (1 Mint Street)Permitted
        30.10.89

        WA89/1537Application for Listed Building Consent for display of non-illuminated hanging sign (1 Mint Street)Permitted
        30.10.89
        WA97/1677 Change of use to dwelling (11 Church Street)Permitted
        10.12.97
        WA97/1779 Erection of extension to existing barn for Class B1 use (office/light industrial) following demolition of outbuilding together with erection of extension and alterations to existing outbuilding to provide new dwelling (3 Mint Street)Permitted
        23.01.98
        WA97/1780Application for Listed Building Consent of extension to barn following demolition of outbuilding together with erection of extension and alterations to other outbuilding following demolition of canopy (3 Mint Street)Permitted
        23.01.98
        WA98/1810 Application for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations (11 Church Street)Permitted
        29.12.98
        WA01/0438Erection of extensions, alterations, rebuilding and conversion of existing barn and outbuildings to provide 4 dwellingsWithdrawn
        27.04.01
        WA01/0439Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of extensions and alterations to existing barn and outbuildings to provide 4 dwellingsWithdrawn
        27.04.01

        Description of Site / Background


        The Proposal
        Submissions in Support

        In support of the application, the agent writes that:-

        Relevant Policies

        Listed Buildings and Conservation Area – Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 – Planning and the Historic Environment, Policy PE12 of the Structure Plan 1994, Policies C1, C3 and C11 of the Adopted Local Plan and Policies HE3 and HE8 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Archaeology – Policies PE12 and PE13 of the Structure Plan and Policy HE14 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Housing – Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing, Policy HS6 of the Adopted Local Plan and Policy H4 of the Replacement Local Plan;
        Town Centre – Policies TC1 and TC2 of the Replacement Local Plan. Main Planning Issues

        The site lies within Godalming town centre, within the Conservation Area, and comprises a range of vacant Grade II listed buildings. In this context, reuse of the site is encouraged, provided that a proposal preserves or enhances the character of the Conservation Area and protects the character and integrity of the Listed Buildings. National Planning Policy Guidance, particularly PPG3 (Housing), emphasises the need for making best use of land, especially that currently under-used and located within a sustainable, central location, as in this case. Whilst Policy TC2 aims to retain existing retail uses, the modest shop unit forming part of this site has already been vacant for a number of years and hence has not contributed to the vitality of that shopping area for sometime. The applicants have not submitted any information regarding the marketing of this unit with a view to seeking an alternative retail use. However, the limited parking and access arrangements, the nature of the buildings themselves and the close proximity of residential properties, impose natural constraints on alternative uses to which these sensitive buildings could be used. The principle of bringing these buildings back into economic use for residential purposes could therefore be acceptable, as the earlier approvals have already partially established. The proposed development density, of 115.4 dwellings per hectare, in this town centre location, would also accord with the requirements of Policy H4 and national planning guidance. No objections are raised by English Heritage or officers to the proposal, in terms of its impact upon the character and integrity of these Grade II listed buildings. Minor changes to detailing, including to the first floor windows to Unit 2 and the retention of an existing cellar, are being sought to address the advice of the Historic Buildings Officer. It is noted that the planning history includes extant permissions for a mixed residential (single unit) and office redevelopment of the site (WA97/1779 & WA97/1780 refer). If permission is granted for the current schemes, then conditions would be appropriate to prevent them being implemented in conjunction with the extent consents. Concerns have been raised in respect of overlooking to adjacent properties, fronting both Mint Street and Church Street. With reference, firstly, to Mint Street, it is noted that this is a narrow lane, measuring up to 6 m in width. It is proposed that a new window in inserted at first floor level, to serve the main bedroom of Unit 3. Whilst this would be a close relationship, given the town centre location of the site, this is considered acceptable.

        Further new first floor windows are proposed to the west elevation (facing the Council Car Park) and in the south elevation, facing across the communal garden towards the rear of other Church Street properties. The latter would serve bathroom windows only. Subject to these being obscured glazed, no material privacy loss to adjacent residents would result. Finally, it is noted that planning permission was granted in 1997 for the change of use of adjacent No. 11 Church Street from offices to a dwelling (WA97/1677 refers). Whilst this permission has not yet been implemented, the impact of the current proposal should not prejudice the amenity of any future occupiers of this building and its rear garden area, in particular by reason of overlooking or over dominance.

        Conclusion

        Recommendation


        1. Standard Approval of Materials (4.4) 2. Standard Obscure Glazing (3.9) *(first floor bathroom / shower room) *(south elevations of the dwellings hereby permitted) 3. Standard No New Windows (11.3) *(first floor walls and roof slopes) *(elevations of Units 1, 2 and 3) 4. All roof lights shall be of a conservation type, with central glazing bar. 5. Approval of Details (23.2) *((a) detailed drawings of eaves / verge, (b) details of all external joinery and (c) weatherboarding, where relevant at scale of 1:5. 6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of the means of the refuse storage to serve the new dwellings shall have been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority. Such provision shall be made prior to the first occupation of these dwellings in accordance with the agreed details.
        7. Standard Tree Protection (25.2) 8. Standard Services (25.4) 9. Standard Landscaping Scheme (25.9) 10. Standard Landscape Works Implementation (25.10) 11. The permission hereby granted shall not be implemented in conjunction with any part of earlier approval WA97/1779.

        Reasons

        1. Standard Approval of Materials (4.4) 2. All roof lights shall be of a conservation type, with central glazing bar 3. Approval of Details (23.2) *((a) detailed drawings of eaves / verge, (b) details of all external joinery and (c) weatherboarding, where relevant at scale of 1:5. 4. The consent hereby granted shall not be implemented in conjunction with any part of earlier approval WA97/1780.


        Reasons
        * * * * *

        B.25WA01/1776
        The Meath Home
        10.09.01
        Alterations and extension to former Day Centre and Laundry to form additional residential care accommodation. The Meath Home, Westbrook Road, Godalming.
        B.26WA01/1777
        The Meath Home
        10.09.01
        Application for Listed Building Consent for alterations and extension to former Day Centre and Laundry to form additional residential care accommodation. The Meath Home, Westbrook Road, Godalming.
        B.27WA01/1778
        The Meath Home
        10.09.01
        Application for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations to provide new boiler room. The Meath Home, Westbrook Road, Godalming.
        Grid Reference:E: 496553 N: 144076
        Town:Godalming
        Ward:Godalming NE and SW
        Development Plan:MGB, AGLV, Godalming Hillsides, ASEQ - outside developed area, TPO, Grade II Listed Building
        Highway Authority:No requirements
        Drainage Authority:No requirements
        Town Council:WA01/1776, WA01/1777, WA01/1778 - no objections, subject to the views of Waverley’s Historic Buildings Officer.

        Relevant History

        WA94/474Erection of extensions and alterations to provide day care centre with ancillary facilities and the erection of four flats.
        Permitted
        07.07.94
        WA94/475Application for Listed Building consent for the erection of extensions and alterations to provide new day care centre and four flats.
        Consent Granted
        07.07.94
        WA99/1938Erection of a conservatory.
        Permitted
        18.01.00
        WA99/1939Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a conservatory.
        Consent Granted
        18.01.00


        Description of Site/Background

        The Meath Home is a registered charity providing support for people with epilepsy. It occupies a substantial 3 storey building located upon the south side of Westbrook Road, to the west of the railway line. The building is rendered with a slate roof and is a Grade II Listed.

        To the rear of the main building is a single storey detached annexe (a curtilage Listed Building). Part of this building was the former day centre and the more westerly wing is the laundry/drying room. This annexe building is constructed in stone with a plain clay tiled roof. Within the laundry room are traditional Victorian drying cupboards of some historical interest.

        The Proposal

        Planning permission and Listed Building Consent are sought as follows:-

        1. WA01/1776 and WA01/1777

        a) The conversion of the former day centre and laundry to 5 en-suite patient rooms, including the provision of communal sitting room, dining room, kitchen utility and bathroom.

        b) The erection of a single storey pitched roof extension measuring 66.08 sqm in floor area, 3 m to the eaves and 5.5 m to the ridge, to provide three further en-suite rooms. The building would be constructed in render with brick dressings and a plain clay tiled roof.

        c) The new build would be linked to the existing annexe by a glazed corridor link measuring 19.8 sq m.

        d) Ramped access for disabled patients would be added to the northern side.

        e) Elevational alterations to the existing building.

        2. WA01/1778

        a) Provision of new boiler room within existing basement area of main building.

        b) Formation of new internal partitions and other minor internal and external alterations to facilitate new boiler room.

        Submissions in Support

        In support of the scheme the agents have put forward the following case:-

        “This application is prompted by new legislation affecting residential care accommodation and a fundamental change of philosophy affecting the provision of residential care …


        … In order to upgrade existing accommodation at The Meath home to comply with the latest legislation, it is first necessary to decant residents to new accommodation. There is also a requirement to move residents from the upper floors of the main home. Carter Jonas has undertaken a feasibility study of all of the existing accommodation on site and this has clearly identified the former day centre and laundry as the first phase of what will become a long term refurbishment project. Social, economic and staffing factors point to the ideal size for a residential care unit to be 8 or 9 beds. In order to meet this provision it is necessary to (a) extend the former day centre and laundry; (b) relocate the boiler house within the basement of the main home (this forms a separate Listed Building Consent application); and (c) remove the laundry drying racks”.

        Furthermore, the Chief Executive of The Meath has also made a submission:-

        Context

        Changing philosophy. Only people with complex physical, psychological and medical needs will be placed in residential care in the future. New legislation regarding room sizes, privacy and facilities.

        Implications for The Meath

        In future our referrals will be for more severely disabled residents who require accommodation on the ground floor in order to access resources and meet health and safety regulations.

        Purchasers are refusing to use rooms which are:-

        Shared
        Too small
        This has severe financial implications for The Meath.

        Meath is unable to modernise existing ground floor accommodation without developing the proposed unit in the old day centre to care for existing residents while building work takes place. Unfortunately housed within this development are a series of drying racks, which have historical interest. Ultimately the unit would be used for training residents to move onto supported living.

        Options

        We have appraised whether the service could be relocated. However the proximity of The Meath, to public transport, leisure and employment opportunities meets the needs of residents and facilitates community integration.

        Relevant Legislation

        National minimum standards by the Department of Health.
        Inspection and Registration. (Guidance to standards in residential care homes).
        Joint investment plan 2001/2004 Surrey Social Services and health authority.
        Valuing people”.


        Relevant Policies

        Surrey Structure Plan 1994 - PE2, PE7, PE12

        Waverley Local Plan 1993 - GB1, RE1, DE5, C4, C8

        Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan - C1, C3, BE5, HE5

        Main Planning Issues

        The principal issues in respect of these proposals are:-

        a) compliance with Green Belt and AGLV policies.

        b) impact upon the character, appearance and historic fabric of the Listed building.

        Whilst there are protected trees upon the site and the site is within the Hillsides Policy Area, there would be no effect upon any trees upon the site and therefore there is no arboricultural issue to consider.

        a) Green Belt Policy

        The site is located within the Green Belt outside of the Godalming Developed Area. Adopted and emerging policies indicate a firm presumption against inappropriate development, including institutional development. Very special circumstances must exist to justify setting aside the normal policies of restraint.

        The erection of a new extension for residential care constitutes a form of inappropriate development.

        However, having regard to the case put forward by the applicants, the Officers consider that the proposal could be supported as an exception to policy.

        The need to provide ground floor accommodation with disabled access at a standard to meet new national requirements is, in the officer's view, justification for the new annexe building which could not easily be provided by any form of adaptation upon the site.

        The Meath House is considered to provide a well-valued, charitable service and has long links with Godalming. In the circumstances, it is considered desirable to support the principle of the proposal.

        Landscape Implications

        The new and altered buildings would be discreetly positioned among the existing complex. The proposals would not, in the officer's view, appear materially prominent within the surrounding AGLV.


        b) Impact upon Listed Building

        The proposed extension would satisfactorily respect the scale and character of the existing annexe.

        The primary concern has been the removal of the historically valued drying cupboards. However, following negotiation, the applicants have agreed to properly record there and lodge the results with the Surrey History Centre. This is considered, on balance, an acceptable compromise, since resistance to the proposals on grounds of loss of the cupboards would undermine the viability of the scheme.

        There is no objection to the formation of a new boiler room on historic building grounds, nor to the associated alterations.

        Recommendation

        1. WA01/1776 - that permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition:

        1. Standard matching materials (23.18)

        Reason

        1. Standard (RC11)

        2. WA01/1777

        That Listed Building Consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

        1. Standard Recording (23.16) *(a detailed record of the drying racks in the laundry room is carried out, the results of which should be lodged at the Surrey Historic Centre and the Godalming Museum.)

        2. Standard Matching Material (23.18)

        3. Standard Details (23.25) *(1:5) *(Windows and doors, glazed corridor) *(a), (b), (c), (f) and (g)

        4. Prior to the commencement of works on site details of the materials and design of rainwater goods shall first be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

        5. Standard Render (23.30)

        Reasons

        2-5. Standard (RC20)

        3. WA01/1778 - that Listed Building Consent be GRANTED.
        * * * * *
        CENTRAL 76
        SCHEDULE 'C' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
        CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
        16TH JANUARY 2002

        Applications determined in accordance with the approved terms of delegation to the Director of Planning and Development.

        Background Papers (DoPD)

        There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

        Plan No.
        Applicant
        Development Proposed
        Site Description
        Decision
        WA01/1572
        P Pang
        Retention of alterations to existing food and drink (Class A3) premises to provide ancillary staff accommodation at Rina's Fish Bar, Kings Road, Farncombe, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/1737
        Mr M A Harry
        Erection of extensions and alterations at 17 Milford Lodge, MilfordGRANTED
        WA01/1767
        Mr & Mrs Franklin
        Erection of a detached dwelling and garage following demolition of existing dwelling on land at Longfield, Petworth Road, WormleyGRANTED
        WA01/1885
        Mr & Mrs Robert Lockley
        Erection of extension and alterations at 57 Yew Tree Road, Witley, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/1957
        Mr & Mrs Tilly
        Erection of a detached garage at 34 West Hill Road, ElsteadGRANTED
        WA01/1978
        B Nash
        Erection of a detached garage (revision of WA01/0598) at Stable Cottage, Church Road, HascombeGRANTED
        WA01/1979
        J H N Hudson
        Erection of a single storey extension (as amplified by letter dated 23.10.01 and by plans received 23.10.01) at Highcroft Cottage, Haslemere Road, MilfordGRANTED
        WA01/1992
        Mr & Mrs O'Connor
        Construction of a pitched roof over existing flat roofed extension (as amplified by plan received 23.01.01) at 8 George Road, MilfordGRANTED
        WA01/1993
        Mr & Mrs Sewell
        Erection of a two storey extension (as amended by plan received 04.12.01) at 20 Park Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/1994
        Mr & Mrs Callaway
        Erection of extensions and alterations at 32 Park Road, GodalmingGRANTED

        WA01/1999
        F A Secrett Ltd
        Erection of a single storey extension and alterations at Secretts Farm Shop, Hurst Farm, Chapel Lane, MilfordGRANTED
        WA01/2004
        Mrs S Skrender
        Erection of a conservatory at Marepond Farm, Markwick Lane, Loxhill, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2005
        Mrs S Skrender
        Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a conservatory at Marepond Farm, Markwick Lane, Loxhill, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2039
        Mr Bailey
        Erection of a replacement dwelling following demolition of existing dwelling at 19 Hawthorn Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2052
        Mr & Mrs Brookings
        Loft conversion; construction of dormer windows at 41 Cliffe Rise, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2053
        Mr & Mrs Porrill
        Erection of a single storey extension at 18 Minster Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2058
        Mr & Mrs Watson
        Erection of a single storey extension following demolition of existing conservatory (as amended by letter dated 12.11.01 and plan received 14.11.01) at Brackens, Petworth Road, WormleyGRANTED
        WA01/2078
        Punch Retail Inns
        Erection of a replacement fire escape staircase at Kings Arms & Royal Hotel, 22-26 High Street, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2079
        Punch Retail Inns
        Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a fire escape staircase following demolition of existing staircase and replacement glazing to ground floor kitchen window at Kings Arms & Royal Hotel, 22-26 High Street, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2092
        Mr & Mrs Bridgwood
        Erection of a two storey extension at Homelea Cottage, Lane End, HambledonGRANTED
        WA01/2097
        Dr R I Spruell
        Erection of a detached double garage following demolition of existing single garage at 148 Peperharow Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2105
        Mr & Mrs Wilson
        Erection of a first floor extension at 8 Roke Close, WitleyGRANTED
        WA01/2113
        Mr & Mrs Saunders
        Erection of a conservatory at Hookley Cottage, Hookley Lane, ElsteadGRANTED

        WA01/2126
        Mr & Mrs Bannister
        Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of existing garage at 21 Quartermile Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2137
        Mr & Mrs Erentz
        Retention of boundary wall and gates at The Corner House, Grosvenor Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2145
        Mr & Mrs Awcock
        Erection of a single storey extension at 19 Llanaway Close, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2156
        S Bartlett
        Erection of a single storey extension (as amended by letter dated 07.12.01 and plans received 10.12.01) at 16 Seymour Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2158
        F A P Hall
        Retention of a second satellite dish at Carrowmore, Gasden Copse, WitleyGRANTED
        WA01/2170
        Charlotte Homes (Surrey) Ltd
        Erection of a double garage and a single garage following demolition of existing garages on land to rear of No. 3/ Tanariga/Jamara, Chapel Lane, MilfordGRANTED
        WA01/2178
        L C Shave
        Outline application for the erection of two dwellings following demolition of an existing dwelling at Wineham, New Road, Wormley, GodalmingREFUSED
        WA01/2181
        Mr Leonard Deeley
        Erection of a two storey extension at Little Culmer, Petworth Road, WormleyGRANTED
        WA01/2207
        Cooper Clarke Group
        Erection of fencing to part of boundary at The Old Coal Yard, Catteshall Lane, GodalmingGRANTED
        WA01/2221
        Mr & Mrs O Korch
        Erection of fencing and garden store at 6 The Hydons, Salt Lane, HydestileGRANTED
        WA01/2232
        Mr & Mrs Isaacs
        Erection of a conservatory at 2 Dell Cottages, Haslemere Road, Brook, WitleyGRANTED
        TM01/0053
        E M Hutley
        Application for consent for works to trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order 42/99 at 26 The Paddock, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0054
        Mr & Mrs T W Bird
        Application to fell two trees the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, WA6/00 at The Nest, 3 Gasden Drive, WitleyGRANTED
        TM01/0056
        J A Rafferty Cook
        Application for works to beech tree the subject of a Tree Preservation Order 41/99 at The Coach House, 45 Twycross Road, GodalmingGRANTED

        TM01/0059
        S Maskell &
        J Hammett
        Application for consent for works to trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order GOD11 at 7 & 8 Woodcote, Frith Hill Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0061
        T Holliday
        Application for consent to fell trees the subject to Tree Preservation Order WA145 at 11 Blackburn Way, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0067
        A W Benham
        Works to Oak tree the subject of a Tree Preservation Order 6/00 at 2 Gasden Drive, WitleyGRANTED
        TM01/0070
        P Rhoades
        Works to beech trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order 42/99 at 12 The Paddock, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0076
        R J Baker
        Application for consent to fell a silver birch tree the subject of Tree Preservation Order 16/01 at 10 Tuesley Corner, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0077
        Mr & Mrs Eakins
        Application for consent to fell cupressus trees and work to red oak tree the subject of Tree Preservation Order 183 at Lyndhurst Oaks, The Fairway, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0085
        P E T Lewis
        Application for consent to fell Horse Chestnut tree the subject of Tree Preservation Order God18 at One Oak, Knoll Road, GodalmingGRANTED
        TM01/0098
        T Holliday,
        Honey Bros Ltd
        Application for works to two Sycamore trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order 16/01 at 1 Tuesley Corner, GodalmingGRANTED
        * * * * *