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 11/05/2005
Agenda and Schedules A, B anc C for the Meeting to be held on 11th May 2005




Fax No: 01483-523399
Your ref:
Our ref:
When calling please ask for: Jean Radley
Direct line: 01483 523400
E-mail: jradley@waverley.gov.uk
Date: 29th April 2005

To: All Members and Substitute
Members of the CENTRAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
SUB-COMMITTEE (Other
Members for Information)

Membership of Central Area Development Control Sub-Committee
Mr M W Byham
Mrs E Cable
Mr M A Edgington
Mr B Grainger-Jones
Mr P Haveron
Mrs P N Mitchell
Mr A Rayner
Mr P S Rivers
Mr J R Sandy
Mr A E B Taylor-Smith
Mr R C Terry
Substitute Members
Liberal DemocratConservative
Mrs J R KeenMr K Webster
Mr J E RobiniMr R J Gates
Mrs J A Slyfield
Mr C C E Slyfield
(Membership to be confirmed on 10th May 2005)


Dear Sir/Madam

A MEETING of the CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE will be held as follows:-

DATE: WEDNESDAY, 11TH MAY 2005

TIME: 7.00 P.M.

The Agenda for the meeting is set out below.

Yours faithfully

CHRISTINE L POINTER

Chief Executive

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. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN

To elect a Chairman of the Sub-Committee for the ensuing Council year.

2. ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN

To elect a Vice-Chairman of the Sub-Committee for the ensuing Council year.

3. MINUTES

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 20th April 2005 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

4. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

To receive apologies for absence and to report any substitutions.

5. DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS

To receive from members declarations of personal and prejudicial interests in relation to any items included on the Agenda for this meeting in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.

6. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

7. SITE INSPECTIONS

7.1 Site Inspections arising from this meeting

In the event of site inspections being necessary as a result of consideration of the applications before this meeting, they will be held on Thursday 19th May 2005 at 8.30 a.m.

7.2 Proposed dates for future site inspections

The Sub-Committee is asked to note the proposed schedule of dates for site inspections for 2005/06 should they be necessary, as follows:-

Thursday 16th June 2005
Thursday 21st July 2005
Thursday 18th August 2005
Thursday 15th September 2005
Thursday 13th October 2005
Thursday 10th November 2005
Thursday 8th December 2005
Thursday 19th January 2006
Thursday 16th February 2006
Thursday 16th March 2006
Thursday 13th April 2006

[All site visits will be held at 8.30 a.m. on Thursdays]

8. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

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

9. PLANNING APPEALS

9.1 Appeals Lodged

The Council has received notice of the following appeals:-

WA04/2418 (O)Erection of a dwelling at Bramswell Road, Godalming.
WA04/2807Erection of a detached two-storey dwelling following demolition of existing bungalow at The Bungalow, Hookley Lane, Elstead.

Background Papers (DoP&D)

Notifications received 8th and 13th April 2005.

9.2 Appeal Decisions

WA04/0796Appeal A - Erection of one detached house and garage, with vehicular access from Petworth Road, and provision of vehicular access and turning within the site for Tansy Cottage, Petworth Road, Witley
(DISMISSED)
Appeal B - Formation of vehicular access to/from Petworth Road, with on site turning at tansy Cottage, Petworth Road, Witley
(DISMISSED)
WA04/0956Erection of an office building, comprising two office floors and associated car parking on land adjacent to Southern House, Flambard Way, Godalming
(ALLOWED)

Background Papers (DoP&D)

Letters from the Planning Inspectorate both dated 21st April 2005.

9.3 Inquiry Arrangements

17th and 18th May 2005
Council Chamber
(Public Inquiry)
Erection of three dwellings with access off Ockfields on land at the rear of 48 - 58 Church Road, Milford (WA04/0374)
7th June 2005
Committee Room 2
(Informal Hearing)
Erection of an agricultural livestock building at Rosewood, Haslemere Road, Brook (WA04/0218)
5th July 2005
Council Chamber
(Public Inquiry)
Change of use from mixed C2/D1 residential and non-residential training use to mixed C1/D1 hotel and non-residential training use at The Manor House, Huxley Close, Godalming (WA04/0585)
9th August 2005 Council Chamber
(Public Inquiry)
Erection of extensions and alterations (WA04/1261) and erection of gates at the main and lodge entrances with ancillary piers, walls and fences at Hambledon Coach House, Vann Lane, Hambledon (WA04/1262)
14th September 2005
Committee Room 2
(Informal Hearing)
Erection of a new dwelling on site of previous workshop/store at Old Forest Stores, Portsmouth Road, Milford (WA04/0771)
4th October 2005
Council Chamber
(Public Inquiry)
Erection of extensions (Revision of WA03/1963) at 4 Parkfield, Godalming, Surrey (WA041102)
29th November 2005
Council Chamber
(Public Inquiry - 2 days)
Erection of 10 dwellings with associated garages and parking following demolition of existing dwelling at Merriewood, Beacon View Road, Elstead (WA04/0477)

Background Papers (CEx)

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

10. 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 (19.06.96 and 20.08.97)

To secure cessation of the use of the land for the stationing of residential caravans and as a contractor’s depot. Further Notices served relating to the barn, mobile home, playhouse and other matters. Appeals dismissed. Notice varied to allow retention of barn. Time for compliance expired 16.07.00 for most things. Offer of Council accommodation refused. Further PCN served. Officers visited the site on 13.05.03. Compliance not achieved. Letter sent to owner’s agent identifying breaches dated 22.05.03. Further offer of Council accommodation refused. Prosecution to follow. Further site visit by Officers on 5.11.04, non-compliance with notice. Further correspondence with agent regarding continuing breach of Enforcement Notice.

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

(c) Croft Nursery, Hookley Lane, Elstead (21.06.00)

To secure:

(a) The demolition of the unauthorised timber building and the removal of any demolition materials from the site.

Appeal against timber building dismissed. Enforcement Notice upheld. Compliance date 06.02.03 (1 year).

(b) The cessation of the use of the additional haulage area, removal of the hard standing and restoration of the land to grass.

Appeal dismissed and notice upheld in respect of additional haulage area. Compliance date 25.09.02. Site inspection has confirmed that compliance has not been achieved. Warning letter sent.

(c) 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.

Appeal allowed in respect of change of use of the site to a use by six lorries and two trailers. Discussions with owners’ agents to ascertain timetable for redevelopment proposals (WA04/1583).

(d) Wareham Brickworks, Haslemere Road, Brook (17.01.01)

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. Injunction given. Enforcement Notice
served. An application against refusal for temporary mobile home went to High Court on 18.12.01. One mobile home has been removed. Further breach with stationing of two touring caravans. Further Enforcement Notice served on 04.10.04. Compliance date 8.5.05. Appeal lodged.

(e) 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 being established. Legal Department considering further response from owner. Enforcement notice served on 06.12.02. Compliance date 17.07.03. Witness statement drafted.


(f) Land at The Star Public House, Milford Road, Elstead (01.05.02)

To secure the removal of a boundary fence erected in place of wall. Condition 3 of application WA01/0693 indicated that, in respect of the southern boundary of the site adjacent to Back Lane, the existing brick wall to be repaired and rebuilt. Retrospective application (WA02/0447) for the retention of the fence refused 01.05.02. New owners of property have been requested to remove fence to comply with terms of original condition. Letter sent requesting removal of boundary fence. New application for modified development is expected. Application not received by 5.11.04. Final warning given to the owners' solicitor. Response from owners is that an application will be submitted. No application received. Enforcement Notice to be drafted.

(g) Land at Beech Cottage, Hookley Lane, Elstead (10.07.03)

Retrospective planning application retention of boundary fence, refused under WA03/0214. Fence required consent following Condition 6 of WA00/0646. Applicant requested to remove fence. No response. PCN served 22.10.03. PCN reply received 11.11.03. Letter sent requesting an application for a more acceptable proposal on 05.01.04. No response received. Meeting with owner on 19.08.04 was constructive. Application expected to show repositioning of fence as at ‘Charters’. Monitoring position. Final warning letter sent.

(h) 49 Minster Road, Godalming (17.09.03)

Detached garage not built according to approved plan (WA99/0162). PCN served 10.07.03. Reply received 14.07.03. Committee resolved to take enforcement action 17.09.03. Enforcement Notice served 10.12.03. Appeal dismissed. Date for compliance 14.01.05. Inspection carried out. Notice not complied with. Draft witness statements have been completed.

(i) Land at Old Portsmouth Road, Thursley (24.10.03)

Two Enforcement Notices served requiring cessation of non-agricultural use and removal of perimeter fence, shed buildings and hardstanding. Appeal lodged. Inquiry held on 16.06.04. Appeal dismissed. One shed allowed to stay. Date for compliance 08.01.05. Notice not complied with. Agent instructed to prosecute 6.4.5.

(j) Land at Hambledon House Farm, Vann Lane, Hambledon (09.02.04)

(k) Tuesley Farm, Tuesley Lane, Godalming (30.06.04)

Enforcement action authorised to secure removal of polytunnels, fences/windbreaks, mobile homes and associated engineering works. Enforcement Notice served on 29.07.04. Appeal lodged. Inquiry will continue in May.

(l) Waitrose, 11-14 Bridge Street, Godalming (04.05.04)

Consent refused for retention of non-illuminated signs. Letter sent 01.06.04 requesting removal. No response received. Final warning letter sent. Discussions have been held about more appropriate signage. Application refused. Awaiting another application.

(m) 9 The Hydons, Salt Lane, Hydestile (01.10.04)

Enforcement Notice served to secure removal of swimming pool enclosure refusal under WA01/0748. Appeal lodged.

(n) 2 The Hatch, The Street, Thursley (20.12.04)

To secure removal of parking area, retaining walls and terraces and restoration of contours of land (following dismissal of appeal against refusal of retrospective permission WA03/2193). Enforcement Notice served. Time for compliance 25.7.05. Appeal lodged.

(o) 30 Coopers Rise, Godalming (27.09.04)

Retrospective planning permission refused (WA03/2315) and appeal dismissed for retention of a dormer window. Compliance requested 2.2.05.

(p) 16 West Hill, Elstead (04.03.04)

Retrospective planning permission refused (WA02/2649) for existing garage. Letter sent 02.12.04 requesting that the garage be altered to comply with scheme permitted under WA02/1650. Amended plans expected shortly.

Background Papers (CEX)

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

11. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

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

Recommendation

That, pursuant to Procedure Rule 20 and in accordance with Section 1004(A) 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 1001 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 12

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)

12. 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
comms/central/2005-06/001
INDEX OF APPLICATIONS
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
11th May 2005
PAGE NO.
ITEM
PLAN REFLOCATION
Site Visit
Part A -Applications subject to Public Speaking
1
A01
WA/2005/0379Merriewood, Beacon View Road, Elstead
12
A02
WA/2005/0623Hazelwood, Hookley Lane, Elstead
19
A03
WA/2005/0395The Slug & Lettuce, 54-56 High Street, Godalming
Part B -Applications not subject to Public Speaking
24
B01
WA/2005/0438Land to the south of Rivendale Cottage, Petworth Road, Milford
27
B02
WA/2005/0439Land to the north of Rivendale Cottage, Petworth Road, Milford
32
B03
WA/2005/0386Unit G & H, Catteshall Mill, Catteshall Road, Godalming
Part C -Applications determined in accordance with the approved scheme of delegation
SCHEDULE “A” TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
11TH MAY 2005

Applications subject to public speaking

Relevant History

WA/2004/0477Erection of 10 dwellings with garaging and parking.
Refused
21/10/04
Appeal lodged
Date of Inquiry 29/11/05

Description of Site/Background

Merriewood is to be found within a triangular site of 0.39 ha, located at the far end of Beacon View Road, just before it meets Red House Lane. The site is in residential use with a detached two storey dwelling set at the western end of the site. There are also a number of sheds within the gardens. The site slopes gently down away from the road and is “wild” towards its eastern end. A ditch separates the site from the road and is crossed by the existing pedestrian and vehicular accesses into the site. The roadside and south-eastern boundaries are marked by a mature hedgerow, with the south-eastern edge punctuated by a number of trees. There is a laurel hedge along the western boundary. A Scots pine and an oak tree within the garden are subject to a tree preservation order.

Beacon View Road is unadopted and is a public footpath. So far as officers are aware, there are no rights of passage over the road for vehicular traffic. It is 6m wide along most of the length of the application site, but narrowing to just over 4m at its junction with Red House Lane.

The site was up until the adoption of the Waverley Local Plan in 2002 outside the settlement of Elstead. In incorporating the site within the settlement the Planning Inspector stated the that including the site in the settlement a ‘cleaner and straighter edge to Elstead would be created’ The inspector accepted that this would create the prospect of a small amount of infilling development being likely as a continuation of the line of dwellings on the south side of Beacon View Road. Importantly, the inspector considered that the site would not intrude into the countryside.

The inspector concluded that the benefits of a logical and even rounding off to Elstead in this location are sufficient to outweigh the limited harm, which might arise from the extension of the of the linear pattern of dwellings alongside the southern side of the road in a modest and quite harmless way. “The development of the site would not, in my judgement, be perceived as an outward extension of the village into the countryside and although the site has something to offer from its openness alone, in this particular case I consider that the boundary should be modified to include it”.

Members will note that planning permission was refused for 10 dwellings on the site in October last year.

The Proposal

The current application has been submitted in order to address the reasons for refusing planning permission for the previous form of development .

It is now proposed to erect 8 dwellings on the site, set in a staggered row, facing towards Beaconview Road and providing a density of 20 dph. The dwellings would comprise 5 detached houses and a terrace of 3 houses, these being affordable units, located at the eastern end of the site. The size of dwellings are as follows

Plot numberNo of bedroomsFloor area (excluding integral garages)
15 + attic room260 sq.m.
2 and 43bed with dressing area + attic room193 sq.m
3 and 53bed with first floor study/bedroom 4+ attic room208.5 sq.m.
6 and 7 2 bed90 sq.m.
82 bed92.5 sq.m.

The detached dwellings would 2˝ storeys in height, making use of the roof space. The three terraced units would be 2 storey, with a low eaves line and incorporating dormer windows into the roof.

Parking for a total of 15 cars is provided, with each detached dwelling having an integral garage together with parking space in front. The affordable units would be provided with a parking space each. Access to the dwellings would be by way of 6 crossovers over the ditch along Beacon View Road, as agreed by the Environment Agency.

A 5m buffer zone would be provided along the rear boundary of the site to provide a wildlife corridor along the existing ditch.

Submissions in Support

A design statement in support of the proposal was submitted with the application. In summary this makes the following points:-

ˇ the site comprises previously developed land and redevelopment provides an opportunity to make more efficient use of land in accordance with local and national policy
ˇ the proposed layout has been designed to work within the constraints of the site and surrounding area and provides a comprehensive and complimentary (sic) scheme that enhances Beacon View Road whilst providing affordable housing units required by Waverley policy
ˇ the proposed new houses have been designed to respect the adjacent buildings and will make a positive contribution in their own right.
ˇ The proposed scheme will provide a high quality development with a mix of units and sizes in a sustainable location.

The developer has also agreed to provide a sum towards future repairs to Beacon View Road and to provide affordable housing on site. Relevant Policies

Policies RU1, DP3, PE2 and PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994
Policies C1, C3, RD1, D1, D4, D7, D14, H4 and H5 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Mix and Density of Dwellings 2003
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Surrey Design 2002
Elstead Village Design Statement 1995

Main Planning Issues

Members will recall that in discussing the previous application, the main concerns related to the density and appearance of the proposed development. Attached as Annexe A to this report is the previous report to committee which sets out the various issues. The reasons for refusal were:-

1. The proposal conflicts with national, strategic and local planning policy advice regarding Green Belt set out in Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy LO4 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. There is a general presumption against inappropriate development and development which adversely affects the openness of the Green Belt. The proposed development does not comply with requirement of those policies. 2. The site lies within the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty within which the area's distinctive landscape character and natural beauty is to be conserved and enhanced. The proposal is inconsistent with this aim and conflicts with the national, strategic and local policy guidance and advice set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE8 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. 3. The site lies within an Area of Great Landscape Value within which the landscape character is to be conserved and enhanced. The proposal is inconsistent with this aim and conflicts with national, strategic and local policies set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE8 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. Because the settlement is “washed over” by Green Belt and landscape policies it is considered that, if the issues raised in reasons 4 and 5 are satisfactorily addressed, reasons 1 to 3 automatically fall by wayside.
It is therefore considered that the main issues for consideration relate to the design and layout of the proposals and whether they comply with Policy H4 of the local plan which sets out the mix and density requirements for residential development.

Design and Layout
The proposal now provides 8 dwellings on the site, set along the frontage to Beacon View Road in a staggered row, with gaps between them of between 2 and 2.5m. The dwelling on plot one is set back furthest from the road at a distance of 16m, reducing to a 6m set back for units 6-8. The relationship between the proposed dwellings and the countryside beyond the settlement boundary remains much as previously proposed, with a spacious setting being provided at the western end of the site, whilst at the narrower, eastern end, development approaches the settlement boundary much more closely, although it is marginally further away than in the previous proposals.

The layout has a strong linear character carrying on the form of development in Beacon View Road, as suggested by the Inspector in his consideration of the settlement boundary. It is considered that the proposed development generally reflects the layout of the dwellings opposite the site, which, whilst they have a greater depth and are mostly set much closer to the road, have a similar frontage width and a similar relationship with each other.

The appearance of the dwellings is varied, with the houses on plots 1, 2 and 4 having fully hipped roofs and those on plots 3 and 5 having barn hips. The terrace comprises a mixture of hipped and half hipped roofs. A range of materials would be used, including stained timber boarding, a rendered finish with brick quoins and traditional tile hanging. All dwellings would have plain tile roofing.
Mix and Density
Policy H4 seeks to provide development at an appropriate density for the site, within the range of 30 to 50 dph. Exceptions may be made where there is a need to have regard to the character of an area. In this case, the proposed density of 20 dph is lower than would normally be expected for a site in this location. However, in considering the previous application for development at a density of 25.6 dph, it was felt that the proposals appeared overintensive and out of character with the locality. Officers therefore consider that it may be appropriate to seek a lower density on this site.

The mix of development also fails to comply with Policy H4 of the local plan. The policy sets out the percentage requirements for size of dwellings and a development of 8 dwellings should provide the following:-

Policy Requirement
Development provision
at least 50% 2-bed units
At least 4 dwellings
3 dwellings
not less than 80% dwellings with 3 bedrooms or less
Not less than 6.4 dwellings
7 dwellings
no more than 20% should be greater than 165sq.m in size (excluding garaging)
No more than1.6 dwellings
5 dwellings

From the above table, it will be noted that the development would appear to comply with the policy in terms of the second criterion. However, the Supplementary Planning Guidance and the glossary to the local plan provide further guidance in this respect. The glossary in the local plan defines a small 3-bedroom dwelling as one where the third bedroom is a small room suitable for use as a single bedroom nursery or study. The floor plans of the three bedroom units show there to be a “bedroom 4/study” on plots 3 and 5 and master suite comprising bedroom bathroom and dressing area on plots 2 and 4. Attic rooms - two of which have a toilet and two others, room to provide a shower room - are also provided to these dwellings. The SPG is clear in its advice that such rooms should be included within the floor space allowance, although where lofts are used for non-habitable accommodation, they do not count. However, these rooms are clearly capable of being habitable, being accessed by proper staircases, fully lit by skylights and gable windows and, in the case of plots 3 and 5, including a toilet and wash basin.

All four proposed three-bedroom units also exceed the size guidelines in the SPG which indicate that a 3 bedroom dwelling should be approximately 90-110 sq.m. The two bedroom units are marginally greater than the guidance figure of 70-90 sq.m.

Officers are therefore concerned that there is a clear conflict with Policy H4, both in terms of mix and density.

Impact on neighbouring dwellings

In terms of the impact on neighbouring dwellings, Coneygarth would be most affected by the new development. It is located some 2m from the western boundary of the application site and has a bathroom window at first floor level and secondary windows serving the kitchen and living room on the ground floor on the flank elevation. These would be some 3 metres from the flank elevation of unit 1 and would suffer some loss of light. However, as they are not the sole source of light to principal rooms, it is not considered that this would be materially harmful to amenity. There would be two windows at first floor level facing Coneygarth, but these are to bathrooms. There are also windows to the kitchen and the study on the ground floor. The dwelling on plot 1 would extend to the rear of the two-storey element of Coneygarth by almost 3 metres. As a result, there would be some overlooking into the rear garden, but this would be oblique and the relationship between the two houses is not considered to be unacceptable.

Members will note that the applicants have offered a sum of money towards the future repairs to Beacon View Road. Officers are of the view that the application is acceptable as submitted and that the provision of a sum to repair the road would not be a material planning requirement given that the Highway Authority have raised no objection to the proposal. In addition as the road is unadopted there would be legal difficulties in making the grant of permission contingent on the repair of an unadopted road the ownership of which is unclear.
View towards Coneygarth
Site Layout

Conclusions

It is evident that there is a clear conflict with Policy H4 arising from the applicant’s endeavours to address the reasons for refusal of the previous application. However, the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on Policy H4 indicates that in exceptional circumstances lower densities may be permitted, providing a convincing case is made that the dwelling size and/or density requirements are incompatible with local character or other constraints. A judgement therefore needs to be made as to whether the need to respect the character of the area and the appearance of the development outweigh the need to maximise the use of land where development may be acceptable in principle.

Officers consider that, having regard to the location of the site on the fringes of the settlement, a lower density is acceptable. It is also considered that the provision of larger houses reflects the character of development at this end of Beacon View Road, being very similar in scale to the dwellings opposite the site.

Officers have had regard to the level of local representation. However, it is considered that, through its inclusion within the settlement boundary, this is a site where there is potential for development. It is a sensitive site on the edge of the village, and any development would have an impact on the transition between the developed part of the village and the countryside beyond. However, much needed affordable housing would be provided as part of the development and it is considered that the reasons for refusal for the previous proposals have been addressed. Officers consider that, on balance, the development proposals would not cause material harm to the character of the area, would bring benefits to the village and are therefore acceptable.

Recommendation

That, subject to the applicants entering into an appropriate legal agreement within 6 months (all costs including those of the Council to be borne by the applicants) to ensure the retention of units 6-8 inclusive as affordable housing.

permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition
Reason
Having regard to the restricted nature of the site, its relationship with the surrounding area and the limited amount of parking available, and to accord with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

3. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

5. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

6. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

7. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

8. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

9. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

10. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

11. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the character and amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

12. Condition
Reason
To safeguard the trees on and around the site and to accord with Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

13. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

14. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

15. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

16. Condition
Reason
In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

17. Condition
Reason
To safeguard the ecological interest of the site in accordance with Policies C11 and D5 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

18. Condition
Reason
To reduce the impact of the proposed development on wildlife habitats upstream and downstream, including bankside habitats, in accordance with Policies C11 and D5 of Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

19. Condition
Reason
To protect the amenity and character of the watercourse and its conservation value as a wildlife corridor, in accordance with Policies C11 and D5 of Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.
* * * * *

A.2WA/2005/0623Erection of 4 dwellings comprising two pairs of semi-detached houses at Hazelwood, Hookley Lane, Elstead
Sovereign Builders Ltd
21/03/2005
Grid Reference:E: 491466 N: 142878
Parish :Elstead
Ward :Elstead and Thursley
Development Plan :Rural Settlement RD1
Highway Authority :Not yet available - to be reported orally
Drainage Authority: No requirements
Parish Council:No comments had been received at the time the report was prepared.
The Parish Council nevertheless had objected to the previous 2 applications on the grounds that the proposal were out of keeping with the surrounding properties and that two storey properties is not consistent with the bungalows in the vicinity. The PC suggested that two bungalows would be more in keeping.
Representations:11 letters of objection based on the following grounds:-
1. the proposal will harm the visual character and distinctiveness of the locality;
2. design and scale not in keeping with surroundings;
3. increase in highway traffic and impact on highway safety, currently there is virtually no on-street parking in Hookley Lane;
4. the bulk of the adjoining properties shown on plans are exaggerated;
5. each plot will only measure a width of 25 feet by contrast other Plots measure 50 feet on average;
6. the frontage area is shown shared between properties, properties in the lane all have their own frontages;
7. a single large parking area dominates the frontage;
8. the proposal only has six car parking spaces for four houses;
9. total disregard to Elstead Village Design Statement;
10. the proposal is contrary to Policy RD1 and the density is too high;
11. the proposal would set dangerous precedents;
12. regular parking of cars in the street outside the village boundary is highly inappropriate in a Conservation Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty;
13. no more than two properties should be allowed and these should be bungalows;
14. loss of light to the amenities of neighbouring property at "Sunnyside" from the proposed house sited less than 4.5 metres away, extending 2 metres beyond the rear building line;
15. a ground floor window would result in overlooking;
16. there is a badgers run through "Hazelwood" and a sett nearby;
17. the neighbouring properties of "Hollywood" and "Jalna" have been inaccurately Plotted. The distance between "Sunnyside" and "High View" is inaccurate;
18. the land is within the Metropolitan Green Belt;
19. "Hazelwood" is at the end of Hookley Lane and near a bridle path used by horse riders, walkers and children;
20. the site is 3/4 mile from the nearest bus route and about a mile from the nearest shop. Village school even further away;
21. the area is prone to flooding;
22. the front garden area would be lost to hardstanding for the parking of vehicles;
24. each of the dwellings has an office room leading to the potential from occupiers running businesses from home;
25. noise and disturbance from so many people living on the site.
26. In the Applicants appeal statement they claim the site is a windfall site, which this is not, and Annex C of PPG3 does not apply.

Relevant History

WA04/0859Outline application for the erection of a building to provide two dwellings and a building to provide three dwellings following demolition of existing dwelling
Withdrawn
8.6.04
WA04/1796Erection of four dwellings, comprising two pairs of semi-detached houses following demolition of existing dwelling
Withdrawn
October 2004
WA04/2294Erection of 4 dwellings , comprising two pairs of semi-detached houses, following demolition of existing dwelling
Refused
14.01.05
Current appeal pending

Description of Site/Background

The site is located within the rural settlement of Elstead washed over by the Green Belt, it is also within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and Area of great Landscape Value (AGLV). The site is located on the north east side of Hookley Lane. Hookley Lane contains a mixture of single storey bungalows, chalet bungalows as well as two storey houses.

The application site measures 0.19 hectares and is occupied by a modest sized single storey bungalow sited to the south east of the Plot close the boundary with the adjoining property "Jalna". The Plot has a width of 32 metres, whilst the house itself measures a width of 10 metres.

This application follows the consideration of application WA/2004/2294 which was the subject of a Sub-Committee site inspection in December last year, was subsequently refused and is currently subject to appeal.

The Proposal

The proposal is to replace the existing small bungalow on site with two pairs of semi-detached houses. Each pair would consist of one three and one two bedroom house. The 3 bed house on plot 1 would have a gable-ended front and 2 bed house on plot 2 would have a sloping pitched roof with the first floor incorporated partially within the roof. The house on plot 3 would have a hip ended roof, with the two bedroom house on plot 4 of similar design to house on plot 2. The northern pair would be sited 2m from the boundary with the adjoining property "Sunnyside" which is sited at an angle to the common boundary leaving 3.4m at the front and 1.8m at the rear. The house on plot 1 would project 2m beyond the rear building line as set by the corner of "Sunnyside".

The two pairs of semi-detached houses would be separated by a minimum gap of 2.5m and be staggered to each other, Plot 3 is sited 5m forward of plot 2; plot 2 would remain 3m away from plot 3 at the front of the site. The proposed house on plot 4 would be sited 1.3m from the boundary with the adjacent property, "Jalna". "Jalna" is sited a further 1.7m from the boundary. The proposed house on plot 4 has been set back 6m back from the front building line of "Jalna" to enable "Jalna" to retain views from the ground floor flank windows along Hookley Lane. As a result the proposal would project 5.8m beyond the rear building line of "Jalna" and be set 3m away from the corner of the property.

A total of eight car parking spaces are proposed at the front of the properties, with landscaping directly in front of the houses and to the sides. At the rear each house would have a garden measuring between 6.5 and 8m in width and a minimum depth of 35 metres.
A total of eight car parking spaces are proposed at the front of the properties, with landscaping directly in front of the houses and to the sides. At the rear each house would have a garden measuring between 6.5 and 8m in width and a minimum depth of 35 metres.

The proposal is a revision to that previously considered by the Sub-Committee and changes have been made to address the concerns raised. The differences between the previously refused scheme and the proposal are:-

* a reduction in ridge heights plot 1 by 0.9m, plot 2 by 0.8m, plot 3 by 1m and plot 4 remains the same.

* increase in on-site parking from 6 to 8 spaces

* two access points instead of one

* landscaping between the access and parking areas

Submissions in Support

A statement in support of the development has been submitted. The conclusions state:-

The site comprises previously developed land and redevelopment of the site provides an opportunity to make more efficient use of land and in accordance with National and Local policy.

The proposal provides a mix of housing sizes in accordance with Policy H4, however these smaller units are designed to respect the prevailing of form of development and the character of the area.

The development accords with all the criteria set out in Policy RD1 and, in particular, would not effect the existing urban/rural transition.

The provision of two access points and planting between the two buildings further emphasises the appearance of the development as two detached units.

The number of parking spaces has been increased to two spaces per unit to address concerns raised by members of the public.

Overall, it is considered that this revised scheme is appropriate for the site and complies with the relevant planning policies.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 2004 - Policies LO4, LO5 and SE4
Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 - Policies D1, D4, C2, C3 and RD1

Main Planning Issues

The main planning issue is the likely impact on the character and appearance of this part of the settlement, the AONB and AGLV and the impact that the proposal would have on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties.

Character and appearance of the settlement AONB and AGLV.

The site falls within the Green Belt but within the Rural Settlement of Elstead where new development will be permitted which is well-related in scale and location and needs to be considered in the light of Local Plan Policy RD1. The policy sets out criteria that need to be complied with if development is to be supported within the settlement.

(a) Comprises infilling of a small gap in an otherwise continuous built up frontage or the development of land or buildings that are substantially surrounded by existing buildings.

Comment

In the case of the current scheme it is considered that the proposal does comprise the infilling of a gap in an otherwise continuous built up frontage. Hookley Lane is a relatively long road with bungalows and two storey houses fronting the road, although the properties tend to be detached with gaps between them the character of the road is one of a built up frontages.

(b) Does not result in development of land which, by reason of its openness, physical characteristics or ecological value, makes a significant contribution to the character and amenities of the village.

Comment

Although the site is relatively large and open in comparison to neighbouring plots, it is flanked by residential properties on either side and the gap that exists on site if lost would not adversely impact on the character and amenities of the village.

(c) Does not adversely affect the urban/rural transition by using open land within the curtilage of buildings at the edge of the settlement.

Comment

The development is considered to involve a form of infilling within the settlement, not on the edge of the rural settlement, and as such the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the urban/rural transition. Although the opposite side of the road is outside the settlement, the view from the opposite side of the road would be one of a continuation of the line of development fronting Hookley Lane.

(d) Takes account of the form, setting, local building style and heritage of the settlement

Comment

The proposal is not considered to be out of character in a road that is made up of a mix of building styles and types including single storey bungalows, chalet bungalows and two storey houses. There is no one uniform building style that prevails and the proposed development would be appropriate to the locality. The materials are considered to be similar to those used in surrounding properties.

(e) Generates a level of traffic which is compatible with the environment of the village and which can be satisfactorily accommodated on the surrounding network.

Comment

Given the number of dwellings served by Hookley Lane the increase in traffic would not be material and would be compatible with the environment. The Highway Authority has raised no objections to the proposal and the traffic generated can be satisfactorily accommodated on the road network.

The proposed car parking exceeds with Council parking requirements.

The proposal site is washed over by the AONB and AGLV, the proposal would infill an existing gap between an established line of residential dwellings. The proposed dwellings would not extend significantly into the rear and would follow the pattern of development in Hookley Lane, as such the proposal is not considered to be harmful to the openness of the AONB and AGLV.

Impact on neighbouring properties.

The proposed siting of house on plot 1 a distance of 2 metres from the boundary with "Sunnyside" and a distance of 3.8 metres from the rear corner of the house would not result in an overbearing appearance on the amenities of the neighbouring property. The proposed house although projecting approximately 2 metres beyond the rear corner of "Sunnyside" is considered to be sited a suitable distance away from the neighbouring property not to impact on the neighbours amenities. "Sunnyside" has a first floor window in the flank wall of the bungalows gable ended roof looking out across the application site, the window is a secondary window to a habitable room which also obtains light from a Velux window in the rear elevation and in any event the 4 metres distance between the properties would not impact on daylight to the window although the view from the window would be altered by the scheme. The planning process does not however protect a right to a view.

Adjacent to the property known as "Jalna" the proposed house on plot 4 would be sited 1.3 metres from the boundary and a distance of 3 metres away from "Jalna". The house itself has been set back from the front of the site by 6 metres to allow the occupier of "Jalna" to have an uninterrupted view along Hookley Lane from a ground floor flank window, as such the proposed house projects 5.8 metres beyond the rear building line of "Jalna". On the rear "Jalna" is a veranda type structure across the rear of the building which is closed off from the living room area of the house. The proposed rearward projection of house number 4 sited 3 metres away from "Jalna" is on balance considered acceptable. It needs to be noted that due to the established pattern of development fronting Hookley Lane in this location houses have a characteristic of having significant staggers to each other rather than following a regular building line.

The applicants had been informed regarding the possible presence of badger setts on site as part of the previously refused application and they have submitted a report from a local Badger Consultant who concluded that there were no badger setts on site and did not consider the proposed development to prevent badgers crossing the site and there would not be any long term effects on the local badger population.

The revised proposal has reduced the bulk and size of the dwellings and improved the visual appearance of the site by reducing the large car parking and access area at the front and providing for landscaping. The site is capable of accommodating the development and the mix of dwelling types accords with the housing mix policy of the WBLP. Although concerns have been raised about the impact on the adjacent properties and the streetscene these are very hard to justify in the context of a development that otherwise meets or exceeds the usual criteria applied to infill proposals.

Summary of Reasons for Granting Planning Permission

The development hereby recommended for approval has been assessed against the Development Plan policies; Policies LO4, LO5 and SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1, D4, C2, C3 and RD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1. Condition
No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition
No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the hard surface areas of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

3. Condition
No development shall take place until details of all proposed screen walls or fences, or similar structures, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and such walls or fences or similar structures as may be approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be erected within a period of from the date of of any part of the approved development, and thereafter be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. Condition
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any other Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no enlargement of any dwelling house as defined within Part 1 of schedule 2, Classes A inclusive of that order, shall be constructed on the site without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason
Having regard to the restrictive nature of the site and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.
* * * * *

A.3WA/2005/0395Use of land to provide areas of external seating ancillary to cafe use at The Slug and Lettuce, 54-56 High Street, Godalming
SFI Group
03/02/2005
Grid Reference:E: 497078 N: 143880
Town :Godalming
Ward :Godalming Central and Ockford
Development Plan :Developed Area
Highway Authority :No objections
Drainage Authority: No requirements
Town Council:Object , the area within the studded zone is too small and the seating will therefore encroach onto the pavement where there are already “pinch points” due to street furniture, and will be to the detriment of pedestrians.
Representations:5 Letters of objections. Comments can be summarised as follows:-
1. The proposal will result in increased noise levels beyond 7.00 pm.
2. The Jack Phillips application was turned down last year.
3. Objected to previous applications the current proposed change of time is an improvement.
4. Slug and Lettuce is a pub and not a Café Bar.
5. Don’t want a bar which serves bottled drinks extending its premises onto the High Street.
6. Bar staff can’t prevent bottled drinks being taken out of the bar area.
7. The premises have a giant TV screen and during significant sporting events in the past the front doors where left open with people spilling out onto the pavement.
8. Considerable disturbance has been caused in the past by amplified music.
9. The proposed area extends 0.766m from the glass front of the premises 4 tables and chairs could not fit into this area.
10. No objection to patrons enjoying a lunch with a glass of wine but not young beer and larger drinkers outside the premises on summer evenings.
11. Under no circumstances should the external seating be available after 6.00 pm and certainly not available at any time to patrons who are primarily drinking alcohol.
12. If such conditions can not be attached then the application should be rejected.
13. There are residential flats In close proximity to The Slug and Lettuce.
14. Small changes of this kind are fuelling the increase in unsociable behaviour and eroding the peaceful and pleasant ambience of this beautiful small town.
Godalming Trust have made the following comments:-
1. In principle the Trust does not object to the proposal.
2. The application needs to be considered carefully against noise nuisance and the free passage of pedestrians and the Trust has strong misgivings concerning the current application by the SFI group.
3. The area defined for table and chairs is unrealistically narrow.
4. The plans are misleading.
5. When tables and chairs were placed outside previously they projected out much further.
6. The useable area of the footway is already restricted by street furniture.
7. Concern that the tables and chairs would not be removed at 6.00 pm and that amplified music would be retained within the café building.
Surrey Police wrote in to state that having studied the application they do not have any adverse comments to make.
One letter of support.
Will enhance ambience of High Street

Relevant History

WA/1999/1515Change of use of land to provide areas of external seating ancillary to café use
Temporary Permission
10/02/2000
WA/2001/0926Use of land to provide areas of external seating ancillary to café use
Temporary Permission 19/07/2001
WA/2002/1032Variation of Condition 1 of WA01/0926 to allow the continued use of land to provide external seating to café use
Refused
05/12/2002
WA/2003/1384Use of land to provide areas of external seating ancillary to café use together with an application for a highway licence
Withdrawn
29/09/2004

Description of Site/Background

The site is located on the northern side of the High Street where it joins Great George Street. The site is within the Central shopping Area The conservation area and the Town Centre. The premises occupies a corner plot with a return frontage into Great George Street. The premises are used as a licensed public house. Planning permission has in the past been granted for temporary 1 year periods for external seating outside the premises although in 2002 under permission WA/2002/1032 permission was refused and a subsequent planning application for extended outdoor seating times was withdrawn reference WA/2003/1384.

The Proposal

The seeks permission for the use of land outside the premises 54/56 High Street for the placing of chairs and tables on the highway. The submitted plans indicate an area of land measuring a depth of 0.766m and a width of 6.45m closest to Great George Street and a further smaller area measuring 3m in length adjacent to the adjoining property.

Submissions in Support

The applicant’s state that the current proposal relates to the same area of land as previously permitted under reference WA/2001/0926, for a limited period to July 2002. An application was made to remove the temporary condition but this was refused December 2002 WA/02/1032.

A subsequent application was made under reference WA/2003/1384 for permission to use the external area for seating until 8.00 pm although due to concerns raised by the planning department this was withdrawn and the current application has been submitted restricting the use until 6.00 pm.

The applicants say they will ensure the following:-

1. The external seating area will be limited to customers sitting at tables.

2. No refreshments served save to customers seated at tables and best endeavours used by management and staff to prevent persons from remaining standing in that area.

3. To monitor compliance with the above, waiting staff instructed to be frequently present in the external seating area when it is being used by customers.

4. The external seating area to be cleared of customers and furniture at 6.00 pm each day with use commencing not before 10.00 am.

5. The management and staff ensure that, if amplified music is being played inside the premises, the doors to the external area shall only be opened to permit entry or exit, and shall not be pinned open.

6. That amplified music shall not be audible beyond the seating area.

7. That the approved area is marked out in studs in the pavement in the manner agreed with the Council and that the use is restricted to that area.

8. The placing of notices inside the entrance reminding customers of the need to leave quietly and have regard at all times to those living and working in the area.

Customers have appreciated the facility of being able to take refreshments outside in the past, and wish to do so again now. Such use would also be beneficial in providing a vibrant street scene for the town.

Relevant Policies

Policies LO3, SE4 and SE5 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004
Policies TC1, TC3, D1, D2 and HE8 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

Main Planning Issues

The main planning issues concern the likely impact the current proposal is likely to have on the amenities of nearby residential properties and the character and appearance of the street and the conservation area.

The proposal involves the creation of a relatively small area for external seating. The proposed glass doors on the front of the property open and it is envisaged that the tables could be positioned partially in the premises so as not to extend beyond the proposed 0.7m depth.

The site is within the Town Centre and where policy TC1 and TC3 apply, Policy TC1 (c) seeks to ‘encourage and retain retail uses …. which attract customers and visitors during and beyond normal shopping hours and add visual interest within the centre’. The proposed external seating is predominantly for daytime use and would cease at 6.00 pm, The applicants have stated in their supporting statement that the outside seating area is only to be used between the hours of 10.00 am and 6.00 pm as such it is unlikely to lead to any anti-social behaviour which has been noted to occur much later in the evenings of Friday’s and Saturday’s. Indeed Surrey Police have stated that they have no objection to the proposal.

It is noted that the site is very close to a number of items of street furniture directly opposite the entrance to the premises and any encroachment onto the pavement will narrow the access. The applicants have stated that a 0.7m deep seating area would ensure that there is a minimum distance of 2m between the edge of the seating area and the nearest object of street furniture a lamppost. The Highways Department have not raised any objections to the proposal.

It is considered that the proposal should be granted on a temporary 1 year permission in line with previous applications on the basis that a twelve month period would enable the Planning Authority to assess any negative impacts that may occur from the use on the amenities of neighbouring residential properties as well as the street scene.

Conclusions

The proposed development has been considered against the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 Polices D1, D4, HE8 and M2 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in harm that would justify refusal.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1. Condition
The development hereby permitted is granted for a temporary period only expiring on 11.05.06, on or before this date, the use shall cease and the land restored to its former condition in accordance with a scheme which shall have been previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason
In order to retain control of the development and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition
The approved area for the placing of tables and chairs shall be marked out on the pavement surface by the use of studs in a manner to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before development commences.

Reason
In accordance with Policy DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policy M2 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 with the terms of the application, to provide for free passage of pedestrians and to ensure the area permitted can be clearly identified on site.

3. Condition
No amplified music shall be provided so as to be audible beyond the seating area hereby agreed.

Reason
In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. Condition
The outside seating area shall not be used after 6 p.m. each evening.

Reason
In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

comms/central/05-06/002
SCHEDULE “B” TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
11TH MAY 2005

Applications not subject to public speaking.
B.1WA/2005/0438Erection of a detached dwelling with vehicular access off Petworth Road and Milford Lodge at Land To The South Of Rivendell Cottage, Petworth Road, Milford.
Charlotte Homes (Surrey) Ltd
04/03/2005
Grid Reference:E: 494606 N: 141825
Parish:Witley
Ward:Milford
Development Plan:Rural Settlement Policy RD1
Highway Authority:No objections subject to conditions
Drainage Authority: No requirements.
Parish Council:Object to the proposal, overdevelopment, no access to Petworth Road under any circumstances. Surrey County Council will be approached regarding Petworth Road access. Plot should have only one extra house for Rivendell, i.e. 05/0439.
Representations:4 letters received
Comments and objections can be summarised as follows.
1. Would object to any building vehicles or equipment being left outside on the grass restricting access to neighbouring properties.
2. The development is excessive in a quite residential area.
3. Overcrowding and out of proportion and character to existing properties either side of Rivendell.
4. Unbalanced and crowded feel to the area.
5. Planning permission granted for alteration works to Rivendell included a garage to the side which could not be built as shown on plan if this proposal is allowed.
6. The proposal with access from Petworth Road would reduce traffic movements in Milford Lodge.
7. Trees at the rear of the site should not be removed.
8. Complaints regarding bonfires being lit on site.
9. Increase in noise and disturbance.
10. Traffic hazard allowing vehicular access of the Petworth Road (A283).
11. Will encourage further accesses of the Petworth Road

Relevant History

WA/2002/1994Outline application for the erection of a new dwelling with access via Milford Lodge.
Granted
05/12/2002
WA/2004/2493Alterations to elevations of existing dwelling and erection of a porch and garage with access from Milford Lodge and Petworth Road.
Granted
23/02/2005
WA/2004/2494Erection of 2 new dwellings with associated garages together with alterations to elevations to existing dwelling, erection of a porch and garage.
Withdrawn
23/02/2005

Description of Site/Background

The application is being reported to Committee at the request of members.

The site is located on the eastern side of Petworth Road and occupies a narrow piece of land between Rivendell Cottage and was formerly part of the side garden of Rivendell. The plot measures a width of 8.8m at the front and narrows at the rear to measure 6.8. The area is characterised predominantly detached dwellings and semi-detached properties with spacing between each dwelling offering views to the rear. The proposal site slopes down from the road and also slops down heading northwards across the site.

The Proposal

The proposal is to construct a two-storey dwelling with the first floor accommodated partially within the roof slope. The proposed house has been designed so as to minimise its overall height and would have a height of 6.3m and a width of 4.8m. The overall depth of the property would be 10m. The property would be sited 1.2m off the boundary with Rivendell sited a further 1.1m off the boundary. On the boundary with the adjoining property New Dawn the property would be sited between 1.5m and 2m off the boundary.

At the front of the property the house lines through with the front building lines of both Rivendell Cottage and New Dawn. At the rear the building projects 3m beyond the rear building line of New Dawn.

Access for vehicles is proposed from the front of the site although there is a small access road at the rear of the site that offers access onto Milford Lodge.

Submissions in Support

The proposed scheme seeks to address concerns on scale, bulk and massing within the established street scene. The design scheme seeks to address local plan objectives, balanced with providing a high quality scheme to serve housing need for small dwellings. The site lies within the built up area of Milford, within a residential setting. The levels slope away from Petworth Road, with the access for pedestrians alongside the main road. The development of this site respects adjoining density and openness providing housing as identified by the Government within PPG3 to meet future housing requirements.

Redevelopment of the site would make better use of the land in accordance with guidance contained within PPG3 will do so in keeping with the established character of Milford and the surrounding development environment.

The design offers minimal impact on the wider established character. The proposal fully respects the residential amenity and not materially impact on the existing built up residential area.

Landscaping would be added to the frontage. Car parking is provided as two spaces for the dwelling, with cycle storage secured to the rear of the building.

The new dwelling when viewed in context with surrounding roofspace will reflect the low level historic roof forms. The broken appearance helps to make the building feel human in scale.

Relevant Policies

Policies SE4 and DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004
Policies D1, D4, M2 and RD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

Main Planning Issues

The main issue is the impact the proposed dwelling would have on the street scene and the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers. The proposed dwelling would be sited between to existing detached dwellings on a narrow strip of former garden area. The proposed dwelling is exceptionally narrow measuring 4.8m when the majority of properties in the area tend to have widths of between 7 – 10m sited on wider plots 12m – 15m wide on average. The proposed plot would have a width across the front of the house of 8m. Although sited off its boundaries by between 1.25m and 1.5m it is considered that the property has been designed to fit onto the site and not respect the character of the street scene which comprises two storey detached and semi-detached houses with generous spacing between the houses offering views through the site and a sense of scale and proportion.

The proposed would result in a very cramped dwelling of a design that is based on the site constraints rather than the character and appearance of the street. Officers are of the opinion that the proposed dwelling would therefore be contrary to policy D1 and D4 whereby it would harm the visual character and distinctiveness of a locality, particularly in respect of the design and scale of the development and its relationship to its surroundings.

The proposed dwelling although narrow is nevertheless long projecting 10m and 3m beyond the rear building line of the adjoining property New Dawn, although sited 1.5m off the boundary would result in an overbearing rearward projection impacting on the residential amenities of the occupiers of New Dawn.

As well as retaining access from Milton Lodge the proposal also seeks to create a new vehicular access off the Petworth Road for the proposed house, Surrey County Council’s Highways Engineers have considered the issue of creating a new access and have stated the following:-

“Traffic speeds outside this site are low as traffic is either leaving the roundabout or approaching the roundabout so the traffic is not travelling at the maximum speed of this road.
The accident record shows that there has only been one accident in 2000 outside the site. A car veered into the path of an oncoming vehicle with no known cause. The visibility from both these accesses is in line with the guidance as set out in Places Streets and Movement.”

On the basis of the above, the Highways Department have not raised any objections to the proposal on highways grounds.

Conclusions

The proposal development has been considered against the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002; Policies D1, D4, M2 and RD1 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would result in harm that would justify refusal.

Recommendation

That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development by reason of the restricted nature of the plot and proximity to neighbouring properties is considered to be an overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of the charcter and appearance of the street scene and the amenities of neighbouring residential properties and would therefore conflict with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.
* * * * *
B.2WA/2005/0439Erection of a detached dwelling and associated garage with access off Petworth Road and Milford Lodge (revision of WA/2004/2494) on land to the north of Rivendell Cottage, Petworth Road, Milford
Charlotte Homes (Surrey) Ltd
04/03/2005
Grid Reference:E: 494606 N: 141825
Parish :Witley
Ward :Milford
Development Plan :Within Settlement RD1, D1, D4 and M2
Highway Authority :No objections subject to conditions.
Drainage Authority: No comment
Parish Council:No objection subject to single rear access and no access to Petworth Road as this is an accident black spot and the Council will be appalled should front access be granted.
Representations:Two letters received. Comments and objections can be summarised as follows. The comments received referred both to this application as well as WA/2005/0438.
12. Would object to any building vehicles or equipment being left outside on the grass restricting access to neighbouring properties.
13. The development is excessive in a quite residential area.
14. Overcrowding and out of proportion and character to existing properties either side of Rivendell.
15. Unbalanced and crowded feel to the area.
16. Planning permission granted for alteration works to Rivendell included a garage to the side which could not be built as shown on plan if this proposal is allowed.
17. The proposal with access from Petworth Road would reduce traffic movements in Milford Lodge.
18. Trees at the rear of the site should not be removed.
19. Complaints regarding bonfires being lit on site.
20. Increase in noise and disturbance.
21. Traffic hazard allowing vehicular access of the Petworth Road (A283).
22. Will encourage further accesses of the Petworth Road

Relevant History

WA/2002/1994Outline application for the erection of a new dwelling with access via Milford Lodge
Granted
05/12/2002
WA/2004/2493Alterations to elevations of existing dwelling and erection of a porch and garage with access from Milford Lodge and Petworth Road
Granted
23/02/2005
WA/2004/2494Erection of 2 new dwellings with associated garages together with alterations to elevations to existing dwelling, erection of a porch and garage.
Withdrawn
23/02/2005

Description of Site/Background

The application is being reported to committee at the request of members.

The site is located on the eastern side of Petworth Road and occupies a area of land directly to the north of Rivendell cottage. The application site was formerly part of the side garden of Rivendell. The plot measures a width of 9.6m and extends the depth of the site some 37m. The area is characterised predominantly detached dwellings and semi-detached properties with spacing between each dwelling offering views to the rear. The proposal site slopes down from the road and also slops down heading northwards across the site. The site already benefits from access from Milford Lodge.

Planning permission was granted Outline permission in 2002 under permission WA/2002/1994 for a detached dwelling although on a larger site than currently proposed.

The Proposal

The current application is for full planning permission for the erection of a detached dwelling. The proposed house would be a two-storey property with part of the first floor accommodated within the roof slope. The property is sited following a similar building line both at the front and at the rear as Rivendell Cottage.

The proposed house would have a width of 6.4m and a depth of 10m measuring a height to the ridge of the roof of 6.4m. The proposed house would be sited 2m off the boundary with Rivendell Cottage and would remain between 3.2 and 5m at the front away from Rivendell Cottage.

Access for vehicles is proposed from Petworth Road at the front of the site although there is a small access road at the rear of the site that offers access onto Milford Lodge.

Submissions in Support

The proposal has been re-designed to have the siting 3.2m away from the extension on the side of Rivendell Cottage.
The eaves height to the front is to be lower to create dormer effect first floor windows.
Lowering of the ridge height to accord with Rivendell Cottage and the overall width of the cottage has been reduced.

Relevant Policies

Policies of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 SE4 and DN2
Policies of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 D1, D4, M2

Main Planning Issues

The main issue is the impact the proposed dwelling would have on the character and appearance of the street scene and the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers. Planning permission has in the past under reference WA/2002/1994 been granted in Outline form for a house on part of this site. The Outline permission relates to a centrally located house on a larger plot than currently proposed. The current proposal nevertheless is for a modest detached house of domestic proportions sited between 3.2m and 5m away from Rivendell Cottage. It is considered that due to the gap between the two houses and modest size of the property the proposed house would not be imposing within the street scene and would not detract from the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would remain 13m away from the adjoining boundary with Milford Lodge.

As well as retaining access from Milton Lodge the proposal also seeks to create a new vehicular access off the Petworth Road for the proposed house, Surrey County Council’s Highways Engineers have considered the issue of creating a new access and have stated the following:-

“Traffic speeds outside this site are low as traffic is either leaving the roundabout or approaching the roundabout so the traffic is not travelling at the maximum speed of this road.
The accident record shows that there has only been one accident in 2000 outside the site. A car veered into the path of an oncoming vehicle with no known cause. The visibility from both these accesses are in line with the guidance as set out in Places Streets and Movement.”

On the basis of the above, the Highways Department have not raised any objections to the proposal on highways grounds.

Conclusions

The proposal development has been considered against the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 Policies D1, D4 and M2 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in harm that would justify refusal.

Summary of Reasons for Granting Planning Permission

The development hereby approved has been assessed against the Development Plan policies; Policies SE4 and DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1, D4 and M2 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

Recommendation

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

1. Condition
No development shall take place until details have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the existing and proposed ground levels of the site and proposed ground levels of the building(s) hereby permitted.

Reason
In the interests of the character and amenities of the area and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition
No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the arear and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

3. Condition
No development shall take place until details of all proposed screen walls or fences, or similar structures, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and such walls or fences or similar structures as may be approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be erected within a period of from the date of of any part of the approved development, and thereafter be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to accord with Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. Condition
Before any other operations are commenced the proposed vehicular/pedestrian access to Petworth Road shall be designed/constructed and provided with visibility zones in accordance with (the approved plans or a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority), all to be permanently maintained to a specification to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the visibility zones shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction.

Reason
In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with, Policy DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policy M2 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

5. Condition
(a) No new development shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans for cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear). The parking/turning area shall be used and retained exclusively for its designated use.

Reason
In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with, Policy DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policy M2 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

6. Condition
No development shall take place until a Method of Construction Statement, to include details of:-

(a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors;
(b) loading and unloading of plant and materials;
(c) storage of plant and materials;

has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction period.

Reason
In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with, Policy DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policy M2 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

Informatives

1. Details of the highway requirements necessary for inclusion in any application seeking approval of reserved matters may be obtained from the Transportation Development Control Division of Surrey County Council.

2. 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.
* * * * *

B.3WA/2005/0386Change of use, alterations and reconstruction of unit H to provide a group medical centre together with associated parking and ancillary works at Units G and H, Catteshall Mill, Catteshall Road, Godalming
The Square Medical Practice
17/02/2005
Grid Reference:E: 498200 N: 144445
Town Council:Godalming
Ward :Godalming, Farncombe and Catteshall
Development Plan :D1, D4, HE8, CF2, IC2, IC9
Highway Authority :No objection
Drainage Authority: No comments
Town Council:No objection but the Council is concerned at the poor transport facilities for patients and the small amount of parking provided. Town Clerk to liase with Practice Manager to see if transport can be improved
Representations:3 letters received raising the following objections/concerns:-
1. overdevelopment - not enough space;
2. 38 parking spaces is not enough for staff and patients, this could lead to on-street parking in adjacent residential roads;
3. the adjacent roads cannot take any more cars especially as they are overloaded with "rat running" journeys;
4. the surgery should be more central to the town;
5. car parking will be a problem as unlike the existing surgery there are no convenient public car parks close by;
6. very few patients would use the possible bus service from the town;
7. there is insufficient parking for the existing offices on the site;
8. light pollution from external lighting;
9. the opportunity should be taken to improve the riverside environment.

Relevant History

WA/2002/23109 new dwellings, conversion of water tower to 4 dwellings, new offices of 950 sq.m and change of use and extension of retained buildings to offices after demolition of certain buildings
Granted
21 /11/ 2003
WA/2002/2311Demolition of buildings
Granted
21 /11/2003

Description of Site/Background

The site is located on the north western side of Catteshall Road and enclosed to the north by the River Wey. The site is within a Conservation Area. The site was formerly the Catteshall Works an industrial site, before planning permission was granted in 2003 under reference WA/2002/2310 for a mixed residential and commercial development. The development involved the demolition of some of the older dilapidated structures on site and the retention of other buildings for both commercial and residential use. The commercial buildings are located to the north whilst to the south are the residential buildings. The two site have independent accesses The residential development is nearing completion whilst the commercial units along the front of Catteshall Road have been let. The area beyond the application site is characterised mainly by residential properties.

The Proposal

The application concerns units G and H of the Catteshall Mill site. This site is currently under development for a mixed use residential and business development comprising refurbishment and new build. Unit G was a two storey brick and slate roofed structure attached to unit H which is a three storey brick and slate roofed building. Unit G is a replacement of the original building, which was structurally unsound, and demolished following notification of the Building Control Department and Planning Department. The buildings are not statutorily listed but are within a Conservation Area.

The proposal is for the replacement of unit G with a new two storey building and its use together with unit H as a Group Medical Practice. This would be for The Square Medical Practice which would relocate from High Street, Godalming. The total floor area involved is 1,236 sq.m which is the same area which has planning permission for B1(a) office use. The new work would be undertaken in sympathetic materials and includes the previously approved glazed atrium entrance on the north east elevation. 46 car parking spaces would be available for the surgery including 5 disabled and mother and baby spaces together with the provision of storage for 12 bicycles.

Submissions in Support

The existing premises occupied by the Practice are unsuitable and it has become necessary for The Practice to relocate to more appropriate accommodation. The purpose of this application is to obtain a change of use of Building G and H to allow the buildings to be occupied by The Square Medical Practice and used as a new health centre. The Square Medical Practice currently occupy a listed building at one end of Godalming High Street with an area of approximately 395 sq.m The Practice serves the whole of Godalming Area, extending as far as Farncombe, Compton, Hascombe and Hydestile. The patient list amounts to a total of approximately 15,000, which would normally require a premises of 1,027 sq.m to comply with the standards indicated by the NHS “Red Book”. Clearly the size of the existing premises is significantly less than is considered acceptable under Government Guidelines. As a consequence the existing building is inappropriate for use as a modern health care premises, and is non-compliant with current and future DDA requirements. Any consideration to expand the existing premises into the adjacent vacant shops , on a short term lease basis, would not be viable and would not be funded by the NHS, as it would not resolve the long term need to build for the future and to expand and extend the provision of health care services at the primary level.

Furthermore, because of the listed planning status of the building, there are constraints and limits upon any improvements or extensions that can be made to the existing premises. The building has no disabled access facilities, lift or disabled w.c. and cannot be altered to incorporate them.

The restricted size of the existing building also has a detrimental effect on the services that can be provided for the community by the Practice. A suitable larger premises will have the benefits of facilitating the employment of more G.P’s to provide health care for an increased number of patients and a wider scope of treatment. Allowing the provision of enhanced services. Absorbing the future changes that will occur in health care provision. Permitting the optimum use to be made of the services of ancillary personnel and raising staff morale and increasing job satisfaction.

Alternative sites have been considered by the practice including Laundry Premises Catteshall Road, Auction Rooms (Bridge Street), Godalming Key site, Langham Park. In all these cases for various reasons the sites were not suitable or would not be completed for some time.

The applicants consider there to be no other suitable alternative accommodation in the locality that is financially viable for the Practice and within the cost limits imposed by the Primary Health Care Trust. Although the site is further from the centre of Godalming than Langham Park, there will be adequate car parking facilities and a regular dedicated mini, or hopper, bus service to collect patients from the Town Centre and deliver them to the new care centre.

The Guildford and Waverley Primary care Trust has been aware of this longstanding deficiency in the provision of services provided in the town and they have given their full support to the planned move to Catteshall Mill.

Relevant Policies

Policies of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 LO1, LO2, LO3, LO7, SE3, SE4, SE5, DN2, DN3, DN12
Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 - Policies D1, D2, D4, D9, D12, C12, HE8, CF2, IC2, IC9, M1, M2, M4, M5 and M9

Main Planning Issues

The Catteshall Mill site is subject to policies IC2 and IC9 of the WBLP and was to be used for industrial and commercial uses. The 2003 planning permission departed from that purpose in accepting a mixed use for commercial and residential use, the latter to subsidise and thus enable the former. In November 2004 approximately one third of the office space, all the smaller units, had been occupied and there had been only one expression of interest in units G/H. Units G/H represent almost 40% of the permitted office floorspace and the commercial agents handling the sale and/or letting of the site feel that the size of unit H is a major factor in the lack of take up. Planning policies are clearly to retain the site in industrial and commercial use and the proposal would conflict with that aim. However, it would be appropriate to consider an exception if circumstances warrant it and Structure Plan policy LO7 envisages that planning authorities will review employment land allocations and if appropriate reallocate for alternative uses.

The present medical practice is located within the town centre, the distance between the sites being 1.6 km by road. This has a floor area of approx. 395 sq.m but, with a patient list of 15,000, under NHS standards the practice should have accommodation of 1,027 sq.m. Units G/H are slightly larger than the standards require but the surplus could be used for additional medical services. The Practice has been very active in pursuing alternative premises with 6 sites actively considered and one, Langham Park, received planning permission in September 2003. Unfortunately a move to that site fell through because of access problems and terms.

Larger premises should result in improved facilities for patient care for the good of the community. They could also facilitate additional medical services locating to the site. From the supporting information it is concluded that a case has been made to relocate. Structure Plan and WBLP policies DN12 and CF2 support new community facilities in appropriate and readily accessible locations.

The new location is clearly less than ideal when compared to the present town centre location where a visit to the practice can readily be linked to other activities and services in the town. This has benefits in transport and sustainability terms from combined journeys. Relocating the practice 1.6 km out of the town centre does not sit comfortably with the aims of Structure Plan policies LO1 - 3, SE4, DN2 and DN3 and WBLP policies D9, M1, M2 and M9. Depending where staff and patients live journey distances could be increased or decreased irrespective of the mode of transport. However given that the Council had accepted a move to Langham Park, 1 km from the existing surgery, the change in journey patterns has already been accepted.

The car parking requirement for the office use is 42 spaces whilst the expected provision is 46 spaces. The maximum car parking standard for doctors' practices is 2 spaces per consulting room and then spaces for staff depending upon their role and availability. The new practice would have 14 consulting rooms, 10 of which would be in full time use and 4 in use by training doctors. The maximum car parking provision for patients would therefore be 28 leaving 18 spaces for staff. The existing practice does not have any on site parking for patients and a recent survey indicates that 50% of patients come by car. It is likely that this proportion might increase but there could still be a significant number who continue to walk or extend or curtail their bus journey to Farncombe. Staff predominantly travel by car. Provision for 12 bicycles is being made to provide for those staff and visitors travelling to and from the site by bike. Surrey County Council's Highways Department was consulted on the proposal but no objections were raised to the scheme.

The site is within a Conservation Area and an Area of High Archaeological Potential. These issues were considered in the earlier permission for mixed use at Catteshall Mill. The current proposal closely follows the principles set by the previous permission and it is considered that there are no adverse implications for these two material considerations.

The site is also in an area subject to flooding and this issue too was addressed in 2003. The physical development of the site is no different in the current application and thus there are no additional implications for flooding or exacerbation of risk. WBLP policy C12 concerns the protection and enhancement of canals and river corridors. The application contains no proposals for the external environment of the site and a landscaping scheme should be required by condition.

Although the proposal would result in a loss of B1 office space on the site the applicants have submitted details of how they have tried to market the site for a commercial user for the past 12 months and whilst the applicants have managed to let the smaller units the large commercial unit known as G and H had very little interest. It is noted that there is a significant amount of vacant commercial office space available to let in the surrounding area.

Conclusions

This is not the ideal site in which to locate an essential community facility. However the reality is that appropriate alternative sites within or close to the town centre to maximise ease of access are not available and in the circumstances permission is recommended.

Summary of Reasons for Granting Planning Permission

The development hereby approved has been assessed against the Development Plan policies; Policies LO1, LO2, LO3, LO7, SE3, SE4, SE5, DN2, DN3 and DN12 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1, D2, D4, D9, D12, C12, HE8, CF2, IC2, IC9, M1, M2, M4, M5 and M9 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

Recommendation

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

1. Condition
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those in the existing building referred to as building H.

Reason
In the interests of the character and appearance of the conservation area and to accord with Policies SE4 and SE5 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1, D4 and HE8 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition
No development shall take place until a detailed landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details and shall be carried out within the first planting season after commencement of the development or as otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years after planting, such maintenance to include the replacement of any trees and shrubs that die or have otherwise become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective. Such replacements to be of same species and size as those originally planted.

Reason
In the interests of the character of the Conservation Area and to accord with Policies SE4 and SE5 of the Surrey Structure Plan 2004 and Policies D1, D4, HE8 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

comms/central/05-06/003
SCHEDULE ‘C’ TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
11TH MAY 2005

Application 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
DM/2005/0001
David January
Demolition notification; GPDO 1995 Part 31 of Schedule 2. Demolition of a pair of semi detached dwellings.
1 Perrior Road & 2 Warren Road, , Godalming.
Deemed Consent
TM/2005/0024
P Marshall
Works to trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order 16/01 (as amended by e-mail dated 07/03/05).
18, Tuesley Corner, Godalming.
TPO Consent
TM/2005/0029
J Woods
Consent to fell one tree and works to others the subject of a Tree Preservation Order 3/03.
Land At Badgers Hollow, Peperharow Road, Godalming.
TPO Consent
TM/2005/0040
R Sellwood
Application to fell 2 trees and work to a third subject of Tree Preservation Order 26/02.
20, Streeters Close, Godalming.
TPO Consent
WA/2004/1877
Mr & Mrs J Maclean
Demolition of existing dwelling, garage and certain outbuildings and the erection of a new dwelling and buildings for ancillary domestic, agricultural or equestrian purposes; alterations and/or extension of certain other outbuildings (revision of WA/2003/2497).
Hill House Farm, Highfield Lane, Thursley.
Withdrawn
WA/2005/0244
Ashley Herman Developments (Mill Lane) Ltd
Conversion of existing dwelling to form 2 dwellings following erection of extensions and alterations.
20, Mill Lane, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0294
Mr & Mrs C Oates
Erection of a two storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing extensions.
Fernbank, Bowlhead Green Road, Brook.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0306
Ifc Anstruther's 1983 Settlement For Eleanor
Application for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations to barns (as amended by letter dated 05/04/05 and plans received 06/04/05).
Lodge Farm, Dunsfold Road, Loxhill, Godalming.
Listed Blg Consent Granted
WA/2005/0327
C Sumner
Construction of dormer windows.
1 Rose Cottages, Dunsfold Road, Loxhill, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0340
I Kerly
Erection of a conservatory.
84, Combe Road, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0344
Mr & Mrs A Guy
Erection of extensions and rebuilding of boundary wall.
1, Station Road, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0347
Mr & Mrs P Gardner
Erection of extensions and alterations.
86, Combe Road, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0351
Vt Careers Management Ltd
Installation of air conditioning units.
Sutton House, Weyside Park, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0374
Mr & Mrs J E Oakey
Erection of a two storey extension (amended by plan dated 04/03/05).
4, Dormers Close, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0376
C Thomas
Erection of pitched roof with provision of first floor accommodation following demolition of existing extension.
Haybarn, Dyehouse Road, Thursley.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0378
Governors Of St Marks C Of E School
Erection of a canopy together with associated works.
St Marks C Of E School, Franklyn Road, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0381
Mr & Mrs J Goodchild
Erection of a two storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing lean-to (revision of WA/2004/0224) (as amplified by letter dated 24/03/05).
April Cottage, Sebastopol Lane, Sandhills, Wormley.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0385
P Brown & C Martin
Erection of a 2.4m boundary fence.
100, Long Gore, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0387
Mr & Mrs Hacking
Erection of a two storey extension and alterations (as amended by letter dated 21/04/05)
Alasdair, Hurtmore Road, Godalming.
Consent Granted
WA/2005/0400
J & A Wright
Erection of an extension and the erection of a new 2.2 m high wall.
4, Parkfield, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0416
Mr & Mrs Cottle
Erection of a two storey extension.
89, Aarons Hill, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0432
Mr & Mrs P Counter
Erection of a two storey extension and alterations.
Chantarelle, Keswick Road, Witley.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0451
Mr & Mrs S Young
Erection of a two storey extension and alterations.
Ham Cottage, Milford Road, Elstead.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0464
Mr & Mrs S Scott
Erection of a single storey extension.
Rustlings, South Munstead Lane, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0472
Mrs Copeland
Erection of a single storey extension following demolition of existing lean-to.
Crickets, Dyehouse Lane, Thursley.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0474
Landed Property Ltd
Erection of a building to provide 3 flats with associated parking and ancillary works following demolition of existing building.
32, Brighton Road, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0485
Barrow Hills School
Erection of a new classroom block following demolition of existing store (variation to consent granted under WA/2003/2242).
Barrow Hills School, Roke Lane, Witley.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0488
T J Dinsmore
Erection of extensions and alterations.
19, Meadow Close, Milford.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0513
G Mcmanus
Erection of a two storey extension (revision of WA/2004/2666).
4 Wellington Place, Farncombe Street, Godalming.
Refused
WA/2005/0554
G & E Hunt
Change of use of ground floor from Class D1 (doctors surgery) to Class B1 (office) use.
Surgery On The Green, The Green, Elstead.
Withdrawn
WA/2005/0572
Mr & Mrs C Wilson
Erection of a replacement dwelling following demolition of existing dwelling.
Land At Badgers, Mark Way, Godalming.
Full Permission
WA/2005/0663
Mr & Mrs D R Bradbury
Erection of a two storey extension.
6 Hydestile Cottages, Hambledon Road, Hambledon.
Withdrawn
WA/2005/0694
M Lloyd-Jones
Erection of a replacement chalet bungalow following demolition of existing bungalow.
Bu-Ran, Gasden Copse, Witley.
Withdrawn

comms/central/05-06/004