Eastern Agenda : Eastern Area Development Control Sub Committee on 27/02/2002

Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Eastern Area Development Control Sub Committee held on 27/02/2002
Eastern Agenda

NOTE FOR MEMBERS

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

AGENDA

1. MINUTES

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 30th January 2002 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

To receive apologies for absence and to report any substitutions.

3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY AND OTHER INTERESTS

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

4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - SITE INSPECTIONS

4.1 Application for consideration following Site Inspection

At its meeting on 30th January 2002, the Sub-Committee deferred consideration of the under-mentioned planning application to enable members to inspect the site in question. The site inspection was scheduled for 5th February 2002 and the report on the application is submitted for the Sub-Committee's consideration.

In considering the report, the attention of the Sub-Committee is drawn to the decision of the Planning Committee, endorsed by the Council, that if an application is deferred to enable a site inspection to be held, there should be no further deferments for second or future site inspections.

(i)	WA01/2110 Stennett Self Drive Hire 07.11.01	Use of land for plant and vehicle hire, erection of new office/workshop building with the installation of fuel tanks, pumps and associated works following demolition of existing buildings on land rear of Gaston Gate Garage, Guildford Road, Cranleigh (as amplified by letter received 23.01.02)

	Grid Reference:	E: 504167 N: 141662
	Parish:	Wonersh
	Ward:	Shamley Green
	Development Plan:	MGB, AGLV (within settlement boundary – Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	Environment Agency – no objection, recommend a condition to control surface water flows
	Parish Council:	We have a number of observations as follows:- (a) The applicant also owns a nearby property Blakeney which has been increasingly used for commercial activity, if he relocates to the new site there is no reason why the Blakeney site should not revert to domestic use only. (b) The present site already has about 17 vehicles which are used at all hours sometimes as early as 4.30 am disturbing neighbours by such unsociable hours. Nearby rear developments have been previously rejected as being inappropriate. In this case it will be essential at least to impose stringent conditions to any development by both the Transport Commission and the local authority to prevent working unsociable hours that could disturb neighbours, to check regularly that the run off interceptor prevents ditch water pollution and restricts the intensification of site usage to acceptable level. (c) Would the location of the proposed fuel pumps be in the best position to minimise hazard and disturbance? Are they essential given the proximity of the commercial petrol/fuel station on the front of the site?
	Consultations:	Environmental Health – recommend a suitable contaminated land condition be added
	Representations:	Four letters of objection on the following grounds:- - significant increase in vehicle movements; - disturbance to residential amenity; - harm to the openness of the Green Belt; - visual impact of replacement buildings.

Relevant History

HM/R 14319	Demolition of garage and erection of new one	Permitted 13.05.64

WA79/1480	Demolition of existing garages and the erection of four dwelling houses	Refused 06.12.79

WA80/0206	Erection of three houses	Refused 03.04.80

WA80/0207	Erection of two houses	Refused 03.04.80
WA80/1210	Change of use from Transport/Haulage Depot to Furniture Warehousing and Removal Business, erection of new warehouse to replace existing workshop (outline)	Refused 21.08.80

WA80/1986	Established Use Certificate application for transport or haulage depot including as subsidiary use garaging and maintenance of cars and commercial vehicles, transport office, maintenance and established use	Granted in part 23.07.81 Allowed in part 05.12.83

WA82/0800	Outline application for the erection of one detached house and double garage	Refused 14.07.82 Dismissed 05.12.83

WA92/0729	Use of land and buildings as waste deposit and recycling depot	Refused 17.09.92

Description of Site/Background

This site lies to the rear of Gaston Gate Service Station and is accessed from the south-west side of Guildford Road. The site is bounded to the north-west by the curtilage of Gaston Gate Cottage and to the south-east by the curtilage of Gaston Copse. To the south-west the site is bounded by East Whipley Nurseries. The site includes a brick and corrugated roof industrial-style building with a total floor area of 140 square metres.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the change of use of the land for plant and vehicle hire, demolition of the existing buildings on site and the erection of a new workshop building of 196 square metres and a two storey office building of 231 square metres.

Submissions in Support

The applicant currently operates from premises at Blakeney, approximately 120 metres from the site. The site at Blakeney lies outside the settlement boundary, within the Green Belt, where any new commercial development would constitute inappropriate development in the countryside. It is proposed that the new building would occupy the position of the existing building and provide additional workshop space by wrapping the new building around the existing adjoining workshop of Gaston Gate Garage. It is the agent's view that this will help screen the unsightly nature of the existing workshop and help enhance the proposed development and the surrounding area. The agent concludes that the relocation of the Plant and Vehicle hire firm cannot be doubted as being beneficial to the local area.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – PE2, PE7, MT2, MT7 and RU1
Surrey Structure Plan Deposit Draft 2001 – LO4, LO6, SE6 and DN2
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – GB1, EM1, MV4, MV8, DE1
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999 – D1, D4, C1, C3, RD1, IC1

Main Planning Issues

The principal planning issues are considered to be:-

1. Principle of proposed change of use

2. Principle of replacement commercial buildings

3. Impact upon amenity of neighbouring properties

4. Impact upon the landscape

5. Highway issues

1. Principle of proposed change of use

An Established Use Certificate was issued following an appeal in December 1983 for use of the land and buildings as a transport or haulage depot including subsidiary use for garaging and maintenance of cars and commercial vehicles, a transport office, maintenance and repairs area, warehousing of goods and all ancillary services including hardstanding. The yard and buildings have subsequently been used for a bus depot and repair centre for Tillingbourne Bus Company, which ceased its operations on the site in early 2001. It is therefore accepted that the site has an established commercial use with a strong association with vehicle maintenance and operation.

It is officers’ opinion that the proposed use of the site for a plant hire business would have similar characteristics to that of the established use and subject to appropriate conditions have no greater impact upon the character and amenity of the area.

2. Principle of proposed replacement commercial building

Policies relating to new development within the settlements, including RU1 and RD1, permit development provided the site is substantially surrounded by existing buildings, does not adversely affect the urban/rural transition, takes account of the form and setting of the settlement, and does not generate a level of traffic which is incompatible with the environment. The site straddles the settlement boundary of Rowly but the proposed building is located wholly within the settlement boundary.

The proposal involves the demolition of an existing brick, breezeblock and mono-pitched corrugated tin roofed building which has a footprint of 140 square metres and a maximum height of 6.5 metres. The replacement building consists of two elements, including a two storey office with an eaves height of 4.1 metres and a ridge height of 7.4 metres and a three bay workshop building with an eaves height of 5.5 metres and ridge height of 7.9 metres. The replacement building would be located 1.5 metres further away from the eastern boundary of the site than the existing building.

Whilst the height of the proposed building is greater than the existing, it is officer's opinion that the visual impact would not be significantly greater because of the pitched roof design and use of more vernacular materials. Given that the proposal largely replaces existing buildings on the site it is not considered that the proposal would adversely affect the rural/urban transition between the settlement and countryside.

3. Impact upon amenity of neighbouring properties

Concern has been raised by neighbouring residents that the proposal would result in the intensification of the use of the site and cause harm to their amenity. It should be noted however that the site has an established lawful use as a haulage and transport depot, and has historically been used as a bus depot. These uses have operated without any restricted conditions limiting numbers of vehicles or hours of operation. It is officers opinion that this application provides an opportunity to provide an increased level of control and it is not considered that the intensity of use would be significantly greater than that that has previously existed.

The Environmental Health Officer has recommended an hours condition to limit the hours when the maintenance and repair of vehicles could be undertaken, and a condition to prevent repairs taking place outside of the proposed buildings. Historically such works and operations could have taken place at any time, and with the existing open buildings, would have resulted in greater noise disturbance. It is considered possible to attach these conditions because of the purpose-built nature of the replacement building. However, it is not considered possible to condition the hours of use of the site given the unrestricted activity that has existed historically and what could take place without the need for planning permission.

Concern has also been raised with regard to the siting of a new fuel pump. This facility would be located on the western side of the site approximately 3 metres from the western boundary. Whilst the pump would be located relatively close to the boundary of the site, it would be located approximately 40 metres from the nearest dwelling. Neither the Environment Agency nor the Environmental Health Officer have raised objection to this proposal. Alternative locations would either restrict access into the site or movement within it, or have a greater impact upon the landscape by siting further from the settlement boundary.

With regard to the impact of the proposed building, it is considered that this would be no greater than the existing structure, given the size of the existing building and the fact that it is bounded to its east by non-residential buildings.

4. Impact upon the landscape

The site is enclosed by tall mature trees along its western boundary, by a tall hedge along its northern boundary, and an existing 2 to 3 metre high wall to its southern boundary. The level of screening is such that the proposal would not result in any demonstrable harm to the character of the landscape. Notwithstanding this, it is the officer’s opinion that the design of the proposed building is an enhancement upon the existing.

5. Highway issues

The site is accessed off the Guildford Road approximately 20 metres south of the Gaston Gate Roundabout. The highway implications of the proposal are considered acceptable by the County Highway Engineer who has raised no objection to the proposal. No highway conditions have been recommended because the existing access is considered acceptable.

Conclusions

The proposal is considered to be acceptable development within the settlement boundary of Rowly, which would not result in any demonstrable harm to the amenities of neighbouring residents or the character of the area. This application was deferred to enable members to visit the site and allow them to visualise the impact of the development on the neighbouring property, particularly with regard to the location of the fuel pump.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1. Standard Approval of Materials (4.4)

2. Standard Levels (4.2)

3. No construction work in connection with the development shall take place on any Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor on any other day except between 7.30 am and 6.00 pm Mondays to Fridays, and between 8.00 am and 1.00 pm on Saturdays, unless in association with an emergency or with the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

4. The repair or maintenance of any vehicle, machinery or equipment associated with the use hereby permitted shall not be carried on outside the hours of 0800 to 1800 Mondays to Fridays, and 0800 to 1400 on Saturdays, and shall not take place on Sundays or Bank holidays.

5. No works of maintenance in connection with the permitted use of the site that involve mechanised tools shall take place outside of the buildings hereby permitted.

6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted:-

(a) a site investigation shall be carried out be an appropriate person to determine the nature and extent of any contamination. The investigation shall be carried out in accordance with a protocol, which shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority;

(b) a written report of the site investigation shall be prepared by an appropriate person. The report shall include the investigation results and details of a remediation scheme to contain, treat or remove any contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority;

(c) the approved remediation scheme shall be fully implemented (either in relation to the development as a whole, or the relevant phase, as appropriate); and

(d) a completion report and certification of completion shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority by an appropriate person stating that remediation has been carried out in accordance with the approved remediation scheme and the site is suitable for the permitted end use.

7. Surface water source control measures shall be carried out in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences.

Reasons

1&2 Standard (RC10)

3-5 Standard (RC5) - *(amenities of nearby residents) *(delete 2&3) *(DE1) *(D1andD4)

6. To ensure any contaminated land is adequately dealt with.

7. To prevent the increased risk of flooding and to improve water quality.

Informative

1. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is currently required for any discharge of sewage or trade effluent onto or into ground and for surface runoff into groundwater. Such consent may be withheld. If there is an existing discharge consent, the applicant should ensure that any increase in volume is permitted under the present conditions.

4.2 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, these will be held at 9.00 a.m. on Tuesday 12th March 2002.

5. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

Attached for consideration and report are Schedules A, B, C and D. Plans and letters of representation, etc. will be available for inspection before the meeting.

6. PLANNING APPEALS

6.1 Appeals Lodged

The Council has received notice of the following appeals:-

WA01/1108	Erection of a detached outbuilding to provide garaging on two levels, single storey extension to dwelling and alterations to elevations of existing dormer windows at Brackenhurst, Pitch Hill, Ewhurst

WA01/1119	Three new detached houses with integral garages on land to rear of Fairfields and Aysgarth at Fairfields, Horsham Road, Cranleigh

Background Papers (CEx)

Notifications received 24.01.02 and 15.02.02 respectively.

6.2 Appeal Decisions

WA01/0443	Demolition or removal of existing lock-up garages and construction of one detached dwelling house at land opposite Little Gables, Ewhurst Road, Cranleigh (DISMISSED)

WA00/2350	Retention of building No. 10 and adjoining hardstanding for storage use, following demolition of building No. 2 and reduction of transport business currently involving a maximum of 8 rigid HGVs and 1 horse box operating from the site to a maximum of 2 rigid bodied HGVs and 1 horse box at Norley Farm, Horsham Road, Cranleigh (DISMISSED)

WA00/2351	Retention of building No. 10 and adjoining hardstanding for storage use, following demolition of buildings Nos. 1 and 2, together with cessation of use of part of site in connection with transport business at Norley Farm, Horsham Road, Cranleigh (ALLOWED)

Background Papers (CEx)

Letters from Planning Inspectorate dated 07.02.02, 18.02.02 and 18.02.02 respectively.

6.3 Inquiry Arrangements

13th March 2002 Committee Room 1 Godalming (Informal Hearing)		Change of use of redundant barn to B1 offices with alterations and car parking at Park Barn, Bramley Park Farm, Home Park Close, Bramley
19th March 2002 Council Chamber Godalming (Public Inquiry)		Without planning permission, change of use of the land and buildings thereon from hobby and recreational ancillary to the use of the existing property, to a mixed use for garage, workshop, storage and habitable residential accommodation at Sunnybrook, Cranleigh Road, Ewhurst (Enforcement)

3rd April 2002 Council Chamber Godalming (Informal Hearing)		Outline application for the erection of an agricultural workers dwelling at Sydney Wood Farm, Rosemary Lane, Alfold
2nd May 2002 Committee Room 2 Godalming (Informal Hearing)		Conversion of existing barn into one private residence at Barnhill Gardens Nursery, The Ridgeway, Ewhurst

11th June 2002 Council Chamber Godalming (Public Inquiry)		Construction of new media centre at Hurtwood House School, Three Miles Road, Holmbury St Mary

Background Papers (CEx)

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

7. ENFORCEMENT ACTION - CURRENT SITUATION

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

(a)

Norley Farm, Horsham Road, Cranleigh

(31.05.95 and 02.04.97) - To secure (i) cessation of the use of land in connection with a transport haulage depot and certain buildings on the land for commercial storage and warehousing purposes; and (ii) the removal of an unauthorised building. Notice upheld by Appeal Inspector subject to amendment. Period for compliance expires July 1999. Revised application for Certificate of Lawful Development granted on 6th March 2000. Planning permission for storage and distribution use from two poultry sheds granted on appeal. Two planning applications to seek the retention of Building 10 following the demolition of either Building 1 or 2 refused on 25.04.01. Appeals received. Inquiry held on 22nd January 2002 and decision reported elsewhere on this agenda.

(b) Land to rear of Tanyard Farm, Woodhill Lane, Shamley Green (02.04.97) - Enforcement and stop notice action to secure the cessation of work and the restoration of the original site contours on the paddock to the rear of Tanyard Farm. Enforcement and Stop Notices served, Stop Notice effective 15th July 1997, Enforcement Notice effective 15th August 1997. Appeals dismissed but period for compliance extended to 9 months. Second Enforcement Notice served relating to summerhouse requiring removal by end of February 1998 - Appeal dismissed. Remedial work has been monitored. Prosecution authorised by Committee to secure compliance with first notice. Evidence being obtained to enforce compliance with notice. Second notice in respect of summerhouse complied with but need for planning permission for its resiting being examined. Owner has requested further guidance concerning the plants which need replacing, and officers have responded. Despite further guidance from officers, plants still not replaced; restocking of plants to be part of enforcement action. Survey of site to establish exact extent of works required was undertaken on 08.01.01. The solicitors for the owner have been advised of the requirements of the Council in respect of ground levels and other matters. Owners have declined to carry out any further works. Counsel has advised that evidence now exists to bring court action. The Sub-Committee authorised action to secure compliance with Enforcement Notice on 08.08.01. Prosecution papers being referred to Counsel.

(c) Land between Newhouse Farm and Collins Farm, to the east of Knowle Lane, Cranleigh (12.08.98 and 06.01.00) - To secure cessation of work and restoration of the original site contours. Enforcement action confirmed on 06.01.00 - legal interests being established. Notice drafted.

(d) Majorland Rew, Godalming Road, Loxhill, Hascombe (12.08.98) - Enforcement action authorised by Central Area Planning Sub-Committee in respect of caravans and contractor’s yard endorsed by this Committee; further action authorised to secure cessation of use of barn for activities unrelated to harvesting and cultivation of trees or agricultural activity, removal of various unauthorised structures and equipment from the site. Appeal lodged in respect of earlier enforcement. Further notice served in respect of matters referred to above and in respect of barn building. Notices upheld, with variations, requiring the cessation of the contractor’s use and removal of structures (with the exception of the barn) and removal of the mobile homes by 16th July 2000. Letter clarifying notices sent to owner. Planning permission granted for agricultural and forestry contractor business. Mobile homes position – meeting taken place, now awaiting response from owners to Council correspondence. Owners have said they will be willing to be nominated for housing on new Dunsfold Housing Association Scheme.

(e) Grist Hill Farm, Guildford Road, Shamley Green, Wonersh - Enforcement action authorised to secure the removal of unauthorised uses (two mobile homes, stud and lorry parking) and prevent further breach of condition. Legal interests being established. Further site inspections undertaken, one mobile home removed and no lorry parking evident; owners intend that applications for Certificate of Lawfulness will be submitted for remaining items.

(f) Lydia Park, Stovold’s Hill, Bramley (06.12.00) – Injunctive action taken to remedy unauthorised changes of use, unauthorised operational development and non-compliance with a condition. Authority given to include in the action further breaches relating to unauthorised developments on the site. Court injunction approved requiring removal of all unauthorised structures by 31st July 2001. Site inspection carried out. Not yet complied with injunction. Appeals against refusal for retrospective permission dismissed.

(g) Sunnybrook, Cranleigh Road, Ewhurst (31.01.01) – Legal action authorised to require owner to cease the residential use of outbuilding. Appeal against notice to be heard at Inquiry on 19th March 2002.

(h) Baynards Park, Horsham Road, Ewhurst (11.07.01) – Legal action authorised to require owner to remove a test track, temporary office and shelter. Witness statement prepared.

(i) Beaver 84, Birtley Road, Bramley (08.08.01) – The serving of a Breach of Condition Notice authorised to ensure compliance with planning condition requiring appropriate turning and parking areas to be made available. Owners of site requested to comply with relevant condition prior to serving of notice.

Background Papers (CEx)

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

8. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public of which notice has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 10.

9. 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 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item 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 this item, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information (as defined by Section 100I of the Act) of the description specified in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:-

Item 10

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).

10. LEGAL ADVICE

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


		For further information or assistance, please telephone Emma McQuillan, Principal Committee Secretary on extension 3351 or 01483 523351.

EASTERN 15

SCHEDULE ‘A’ TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
EASTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
27TH FEBRUARY 2002

Applications where the considerations involved are clearly defined.

Background Papers

(DoPD)

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report are listed under the “Representations” heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading “Background Papers”.

The implications for crime, disorder and community safety have been appraised in the following applications but it is not considered that any consideration of that type arises unless it is specifically referred to in a particular report.

A.1	WA01/2420 Beechcroft Developments Ltd 21.12.01	Erection of a two-storey building to provide six affordable (shared ownership) flats with parking and associated works on part of site (as amended by plans received 12.02.02 and amplified by letters received 29.01.02 and 12.02.02) on land at The Bramley Grange Hotel, Horsham Road, Bramley
	Grid Reference:	E: 500722 N: 145030

	Parish:	Bramley
	Ward:	Bramley
	Development Plan:	MGB, Conservation Area (within settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	Recommend conditions relating to on site parking and construction related parking
	Drainage Authority:	Not yet received – to be reported orally
	Parish Council:	Members expressed surprise that officers were now actively considering development on that part of the site when they had previously regarded it as unsuitable for residential use for a number of reasons. Nevertheless, the current application was considered by members under the rules regarding affordable housing exceptions policy, as part of the overall development of the site. Having noted that the number of units was well below the 30% laid down by Government policy and the Waverley Local Plan, members raised a formal objection to this current application.
	Consultations:	Housing Enabling Officer - I can confirm that the size and tenure of the units proposed meets the requirements of the Housing Department in the light of the recent Housing Needs Survey. It is proposed that that English Rural Housing Association would be the owners of these properties and would then sell the properties to people with a local connection to the Parish of Bramley on a shared ownership basis. County Archaeologist - recommends a condition requiring a scheme of archaeological work
	Representations:	Four letters of objection, including a letter from the Beeches Residents’ Management Limited, concerned with the following: 1. reduces likelihood of hotel development; 2. loss of hotel car park; 3. site not suitable for young families; 4. not appropriate to Conservation Area; 5. conflict with access to existing properties; 6. building forward of building line. Three letters of support stating that the proposal is for affordable housing and that it would be in keeping with the character of the village Rural Housing Trust - letter of support

Description of Site and Background

This application has been submitted following the Sub-Committee's resolution on 28th November 2001 to defer application WA01/0612 in order to ascertain whether a scheme for affordable housing units could be provided on the former hotel car park in conjunction with the redevelopment of the Bramley Grange Hotel site.

The site comprises approximately 0.16 ha of land to the east of the Beeches development and currently comprises part of the customer and staff car park for the former Bramley Grange Hotel. The site is defined by a retaining brick wall and mature trees to its north and east and by the existing access road to its south and west.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of six affordable flats with a total floor area of 567 sq m and in the form of a single two-storey building.

Submissions in Support

In support of the application, planning agents, Barton Willmore, acting on behalf of the agents, state the following:

1. We understand that the proposals for affordable housing are acceptable to the Council's Housing Enabling Officer.

2. The site is within the Conservation Area. On conservation grounds, a single block of six flats is considered to be in keeping with the characteristics of the Conservation Area which comprises predominantly large detached housing, fronting Horsham Road, rather than groups of small houses.

3. The proportion of affordable housing represents 23% of total dwellings (six units of affordable housing out of a development of 26 units. It is proposed to provide six units of two-bedroomed accommodation of 71 sq m.

4. The site proposed for affordable housing is currently laid out as a car park for the former hotel use. With the demolition of the hotel and redevelopment of the site for housing, the use of the site for car parking is no longer relevant or necessary. A use which meets identified local housing needs by providing affordable housing would be in accordance with Policy H5 of the Local Plan.

5. PPG3 on Housing states that new housing developments should secure a better social mix "by avoiding the creation of large areas of housing of similar characteristics". Beechcroft's proposals provide a block of six units of affordable housing immediately adjacent to a block of sheltered apartments for the elderly and are therefore in accordance with PPG3. For funding and management purposes, the existing quiet communal area behind the sheltered apartments, funded by a service charge of residents, is retained for the elderly. The requirements for the affordable housing will be met within the land to be transferred to the Rural Housing Trust.

In addition, The Rural Housing Trust has submitted a supporting statement which is included at Annexe 1 of this agenda.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies RU1, PE10 and PE12
Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 – Policies LO4, SE3 and SE4
Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – Policies RS1, HS2 and C11
Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999 – Policies RD1, LT2, H5 and HE8

Main Planning Issues

It is considered that the principal planning issues are:

1. Loss of hotel use and compliance with policy.

2. Impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents.

3. Impact on the character of the Conservation Area.

4. Highway issues.

Policy issues

This application has been submitted in order to demonstrate whether it would be possible to develop the site for affordable housing units, following the deferral of consideration of application WA01/0612 relating to the redevelopment of the former Bramley Grange Hotel. Whilst implementation of this scheme would have a significant impact on the viability of a hotel use, by resulting in a significant loss of parking provision, it is considered that this issue must be considered as part of application WA01/0612. Therefore, approval of this application should be subject to the granting of planning permission for the redevelopment of the hotel site for an alternative use.

Policy H5 of the Replacement Local Plan requires 30% of new housing units to be for affordable housing. The proposed six units represents a 23% provision for the entire site, including application WA01/0612. This lower level of provision is due to the physical constraints of the site and from officers' opinion that any larger building would be detrimental to the amenities of neighbouring properties and the character of the area. It is officers’ opinion that this provision would meet the requirements of Policy H5 when taking into consideration the allowance made in paragraph 6.41 of the Replacement Local Plan to sheltered housing for the elderly.

Impact upon the amenity of neighbouring residents

Concern has been raised by neighbouring properties with regard to whether this would be an appropriate location for the future inhabitants of this development, in terms of the impact upon neighbours and the lack of amenity space. The original intention was that this housing would be for family units. However, in consultation with the Rural Housing Trust and the Housing Department, it has been agreed by the applicant that the future occupiers would not be family units but would be individuals or couples. The statement provided by the Rural Housing Trust and annexed to this report provides further information on the tenure of the properties and the nature of the residents. It is officers’ opinion that the site is appropriate for the types of occupants now being considered and that there would not be any adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours.

Impact on the character of the Conservation Area

The proposed design of the building is that of a single two-storey structure, with brick walls and tiled roof. The design is intended to reflect the character of residential development along Horsham Road, particularly to the north, as well as reflect the character of the former hotel building which is carried through in the proposed replacement building. It is officers’ opinion that the design of the building would protect and enhance the character of the Conservation Area.

Whilst the development would be forward of the existing immediate building line it would not be adverse to the character of the area.

Highway Issues

Concern has been raised that the proposed development might result in a conflict with existing access to the Beeches garaging and parking area. However, the proposal would comply with both locally adopted parking standards for residential units and those specified in PPG3, thereby providing sufficient parking space on site and preventing any obstruction to the existing access road. The County Highway Authority have recommended conditions to ensure that these spaces are made available permanently. The proposal therefore conforms with parking requirements and should include sufficient parking to prevent parking on the access road.

Conclusions

It is considered that the proposed development of affordable housing would be appropriate for its location, protect the character of the Conservation Area and not harm the amenities of neighbouring residents.

Recommendation

That, subject to the principle of the loss of the hotel use being accepted by the approval of WA01/0612 and that the applicant enters into an appropriate legal agreement within six months of the date of this resolution to ensure that the development remains low-cost housing for occupation by local people, the costs of the agreement to be borne by the applicants, permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard approval of materials (4.4)

2. Standard on site parking (H14) *(a, b, c, d)

3. Standard construction vehicles (H15) *(a, b, c)

Reasons

1. Standard (RC10)

2 & 3. Standard (HR1)

Informative

1. H(Inf)7

* * * * *

A.2	WA01/0612 Beechcroft Developments Limited 05.04.01	Redevelopment of hotel site to provide sheltered elderly persons accommodation of 16 apartments, four attached houses and a secretary's flat together with swimming pool/leisure facilities, basement parking for 25 cars with associated above ground car park on land at Bramley Grange Hotel, Horsham Road, Bramley (as amended by plans received 03.09.01 and 08.02.02)

A.3	WA01/0613 Beechcroft Developments Limited 05.04.01	Application for Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of remaining hotel buildings at Bramley Grange Hotel, Horsham Road, Bramley

	Grid Reference:	E: 500747 N: 144924

	Parish:	Bramley
	Ward:	Bramley
	Development Plan:	MGB, Conservation Area (within settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	Recommend conditions
	Drainage Authority:	Environment Agency - recommends condition
	Parish Council:	Members decided by five votes to one to object to the proposed change of use and the erection of flats instead of an hotel - following observations made:- • the parish council survey conducted during the earlier planning appeal process had come out overwhelmingly for replacement hotel accommodation; • councillors were sympathetic to the plight of the occupants of the service flats but the Parish Council needed to represent the overall needs of the whole community; • the developer's tourist accommodation argument was flawed in that, by general knowledge and personal experience, demand for such facilities remained high;

		• the developer's arguments for avoiding compliance with affordable housing requirements - interpreting "sheltered" as equating to social housing need - as specious and unsustainable.
	Consultations:	English Heritage - do not wish to make any representations County Archaeologist – requested trial digs to be undertaken prior to the granting of any consent South East England Tourist Board - see report Langley Bridges - see report Guildford Borough Council – no objection subject to compliance with the relevant planning policies Waverley Business Forum – see report Surrey Tourism Group - recommend that the site under consideration be retained for hotel use.
	Representations:	Six letters of objection, including the Bramley Society, on the following grounds:- 1. loss of hotel use; 2. pedestrian access off Snowdenham Lane unacceptable; 3. affordable housing should be located where there is public transport available; 4. loss of privacy. One letter of comment, not objecting in principle. Eleven letters of support, two of which state that it represents the occupiers of the flats formerly attached to the Bramley Grange Hotel and the Beeches.

Relevant History

WA76/0796	Erection of 16 service flats with 28 car spaces	Permitted 28.09.76

WA77/0514	Erection of 16 service flats with 28 car spaces	Refused 26.06.77 Dismissed 01.02.78

WA77/0630	Revision to car park layout to provide 36 spaces	Permitted 20.06.77

WA77/1737	Use of new accommodation as 16 service flats free from hotel occupancy condition	Refused 08.03.78

WA79/0061	Use as 16 service flats without complying with occupancy condition	Permitted 20.04.79

WA79/1176	Retention of two garages and the erection of a further 25 garages to serve new flats and for use by guests	Permitted 04.10.79

WA80/0966	Proposed squash complex and associated amenities along with parking and garaging	Permitted 31.03.81

WA81/0506	Erection of 20 four-bedroomed detached two-storey houses with double garages	Refused 30.01.81

WA83/0971	Erection of nine two-bedroomed flats, seven one-bedroom flats, two one-bedroom studio flats, two bed-sit studio flats plus 20 garages; construction of 19 car parking spaces and 14 garages for the hotel	Permitted 29.03.84

WA86/1526	Erection of two-storey extension to provide 20 bedrooms	Permitted 24.03.87

WA88/1697	Erection of an extension to provide 20 additional bedrooms and new delivery point	Permitted 03.10.88

WA97/1503	Erection of building to provide 27 flats together with the erection of six attached dwellings with associated works following demolition of existing hotel buildings	Refused 06.02.98 Withdrawn 06.07.99

WA97/1504	Change of use of service apartments to independent dwellings	Refused 06.02.98 Withdrawn 06.07.99

WA97/1598	Application for Conservation Area Consent to demolish remaining hotel buildings	Refused 06.02.98 Withdrawn 06.07.99

This item was deferred at a previous meeting to enable officers to request an application for the proposed development of an affordable housing scheme on the former car park.

Description of Site/Background

The site comprises 0.6 ha of land to the north-west of the Horsham Road and Snowdenham Lane road junction within the settlement boundary of Bramley. The site currently comprises the remaining two southernmost wings of the former Bramley Grange Hotel, which are two-storeys in height, with rendered walls and tiled roofs. The southernmost of these is the former service wing to the hotel and lies immediately adjacent to Snowdenham Lane. The main range of the hotel was destroyed by fire in 1996. To the north of the former hotel lies a two-storey range of service flats.

The site lies within the Bramley Conservation Area.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the redevelopment of the site to provide sheltered elderly persons accommodation, comprising 16 apartments and four attached houses and a secretary's flat. The development would also include a swimming pool and leisure facilities to serve the proposed accommodation and the existing service flats.

Submissions in Support

In summarising the issue of hotel loss, the relevant extract from the supporting statement states:-

“FPD Savills have investigated the issue of hotel viability and the possible future use of the site for a hotel. Their conclusions suggest that the minimum hotel size would be for a 50 plus bedroomed hotel of a budget style. The planning restrictions on further development of the existing site are likely to inhibit the ability to provide additional ancillary facilities such as conference/banqueting/bar/restaurant and leisure facilities. Higher grade hotels require extensive grounds and a town/city centre location with good motorway/trunk road access where they can attract a greater clientele. Bramley has a limited need for overnight accommodation which can, in any event, be met by existing facilities. Finally, there appears little demand for new build hotel accommodation in the Guildford area and supply of accommodation is more than adequate to meet existing demand.”

Relevant Policy

Surrey County Structure Plan 1994

PE10 – The protection of urban character
PE12 – Conserving the heritage
PE13 – Heritage records and archaeological investigation
MT5 – provision of off-street car parking
DP3 – housing needs
DP23 – hotel provision
RU1 – rural settlements

Surrey County Structure Plan Deposit Draft 2001

SE3 – Urban design and quality of development
DN3 – Parking provision
DN10 – Housing type and need
DN11 – Affordable housing
DN15 – Tourist facilities

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993

HS2 – Affordable housing
MV4 – Traffic movements
C11 – Development in Conservation Areas
C19 – Archaeology

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan Deposit Draft 1999

D1- Environmental implications of development
D4 – Design and Layout
HE8 – Conservation Areas
H5 – Subsidised affordable housing within settlements
LT2 – Retention of visitor accommodation

Of particular relevance to this application is Policy LT2 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999 which seeks to protect existing leisure and tourist related accommodation and facilities. It states:-

The Council will seek to retain visitor related facilities. When considering development proposals(including changes of use) which would involve the loss or partial loss of visitor-related facilities (including hotels, food establishments and public houses), the Council will take into account:-

(a) the viability of the existing enterprise and the public demand for it;

(b) the presence and availability of other similar establishments within the same town, settlement or general area offering the same or similar services;

(c) the merits of the development proposed and its compliance or conflict with other Plan policies.

Planning Issues

The relevant planning issues include:-

1. Loss of hotel use

2. Affordable housing requirements

3. Impact upon the Conservation Area and streetscene

4. Impact upon the amenity of neighbouring residents

5. Archaeology

6. Highway issues

1. Loss of hotel use

As stated above, Policy LT2 of the Replacement Local Plan seeks to protect visitor accommodation. The applicants have sought to address this issue by way of submissions by appointed consultants. As part of the original submission of the application, a report from FPD Savills was provided. This report, commissioned by the applicants, undertook to research the viability of a hotel development on the site and investigate the viability and location of alternative hotel facilities and the demand for such facilities in the context of Policy LT2.

The report sought to demonstrate that the Bramley/Guildford area has a wide range of 3 and 4 star hotels offering both traditional town/village located hotels and purpose built hotels on the outskirts. These hotels offer a wide range of restaurant/bar, conference and leisure facilities with on site car parking adjacent to the hotel buildings. In addition, Bramley is served by two bed and breakfast establishments, namely The Jolly Farmer and The Wheatsheaf.

The report concluded that the site is unlikely to be redeveloped for hotel purposes for the following reasons:-

(a) The property has not traded as a hotel for the past five years. Trade would need to be regenerated as the “inherent goodwill” of the site as a former hotel is insufficient to create demand. Additionally the 16 serviced flats adjoining will, under an existing Section 52 Agreement, require any hotel to provide the flats with a full range of services, a further constraint which any potential hotel operator would need to consider.

(b) Given the existing site constraints in terms of the potential numbers of bedrooms, layout and configuration and limited conference facilities, the site is far less attractive to an hotel operator than either a new build, or more established hotel in a better location within a larger site area.

(c) Existing levels of hotel supply both of land and existing buildings more than adequately meet the levels of demand as demonstrated by the low occupancies currently achieved in Waverley and Guildford Districts and the lack of developer activity on the sites identified by Guildford Borough Local Plan.

The view of the South East England Tourist Board (SEETB) was sought to ascertain the validity of the FPD Savills report conclusions. Whilst the Board disagreed with the view that occupancy rates were relatively low, being 71% in 2000, it considered, on balance, that the report was a fair resume of the issues and that it would be unlikely that a quality operator would be interested in developing a ‘relatively modest’ number of rooms on the site.

Whilst the SEETB did not disagree with the principal conclusions of the FPD Savills report, it was considered by officers that further independent advice was required to firmly establish whether redevelopment of the site for a hotel use was realistic. Therefore Henley Lodges Ltd were instructed to provide an independent opinion. Henley Lodges Ltd had been successfully employed by the Borough Council in preventing the change of use of the Georgian Hotel in Haslemere.

Henley Lodges examined the SEETB occupancy reports for 1999 and 2000 as well as all other correspondence, supporting information and consultation responses relating to this application. The executive summary of their report is as follows:-

1. The Savills report, by excluding 1999 occupancy rates as a comparison with 2000, has arrived at a number of flawed conclusions. However, we concur with the main conclusions of the report at point 7.11, i.e. that redevelopment of the site for hotel purposes is unlikely to occur.

2. That the Bramley Grange site is suitable for a hotel in terms of its size and location but that its appeal is reduced by the planning and conservation constraints.

3. A hotel with fewer than 50 bedrooms can be viable.

4. The constraints do not restrict the site only to a budget hotel.

5. They are adequately supplied with hotels.

6. Conference and leisure facilities would be essential for the viability of a new build hotel on this site.

7. Given the planning and conservation constraints that the site is unlikely to be large enough to accommodate conference and leisure facilities.

Following the deferment of this application at the earlier sub-committee meeting, the applicants sought the advice of another hotel consultant, Strategic Leisure Ltd. Whereas the advice within the Savills report relied on hotel room occupancy figures, the Strategic Leisure Ltd report relies on estimated market penetration. The report's overall conclusion is that a hotel development would not be appropriate for this site.

As with the Savills report, the view of Henley Lodges Ltd has been obtained on the validity of this latest report. Henley Lodges Ltd accept the conclusions of this report as being a fair assessment of the site and state that their own conclusions and previous comments on the Savills report are unchanged.

In addition to the receipt of the Strategic Leisure Ltd report officers have consulted the Waverley Business Forum and written to two agents who previously showed interest in the site for a hotel use and an existing interested party.

The Waverley Business Forum is in favour of any development such as the provision of a hotel which would add to employment and tourism opportunities. They have anecdotal evidence from their members of a perceived need for budget accommodation especially for business visitors. They advise that budget hotels need to be located near trunk roads with ease of access and competitive pricing. They do not believe that the Bramley Grange site is suitable for a three or four star hotel as the site area is too limited to create enough quality rooms to make a return and hard marketing would be needed to rebuild a customer base after such a long closure. The Forum considered that if a budget operator is not interested in the site then a residential scheme may be acceptable if a substantial element of it is for low-cost social housing and recommend refusal to enable a renegotiated scheme.

Only one response has been received from agents previously interested in the site, stating that his client would not consider the site unless it could accommodate 120 bedrooms and understands that this would be considered as over-development. The existing interested party has requested to remain confidential and has failed to provide any material evidence of interest in the site such as a marketing/viability report.

To summarise, it is officers' opinion that the applicants have adequately demonstrated that, given the planning and physical constraints, the site is not viable for a hotel use. This view has been supported by an independent analysis.

2. Affordable housing provision

Policy H5 of the Replacement Local Plan seeks to provide a proportion of subsidised affordable housing on those sites which fall within the threshold criteria set out in the Plan. Paragraph 6.44 of the Plan acknowledges that applications for specialised sheltered housing would be making a contribution to the housing needs of the Borough and states that the Council will seek to ensure an element of subsidised affordable housing.

Whilst the applicants have sought to convince the Council that there is not a requirement to provide a contribution to subsidised affordable housing as the proposed development would be directly contributing towards the Borough's housing needs, they have accepted the need for an appropriate level of contribution. The applicants therefore propose to transfer to the Council or to a Registered Social Landlord of the Council's choosing, land to the north of the site for the purposes of social housing. This area of land comprises approximately 0.2 ha and is the subject of application WA01/2420, considered elsewhere on this agenda.

Officers had previously indicated that this site could be developed for eight units. However, in considering detailed proposals, it has become evident that the site can only accommodate six units, in order to protect the amenities of neighbouring properties and to ensure that the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the area.

One of the conclusions of the 2001 Housing Needs Survey states "a significant finding from the study is the projected increase in the over 80 year old population between 1996 and 2016. In view of the relationship between increasing age and dependency, consideration will need to be given to the related housing and care needs of the particular sector if the needs of this group of people are to be effectively addressed." Given that the application proposes sheltered accommodation for the elderly and therefore is seeking to meet a particular housing need, it is officers’ opinion that the level of contribution proposed is acceptable.

3. Impact upon the Conservation Area and streetscene

The site is located within a prominent position within the Bramley Conservation Area. Prior to the fire that destroyed much of the hotel, the buildings on the site made a significant contribution to the character of the area and to defining the streetscene. Whilst the remaining buildings retain the historic enclosure to Snowdenham Lane, the contribution to the Horsham Road has been lost.

The principal objectives in terms of the Conservation Area are to maintain the enclosure along Snowdenham Lane and to satisfactorily address the junction with Horsham Road. By adopting the design and footprint based on the previous building, it is officers’ opinion that the proposal meets these objectives. The proposed detailing of the building and use of appropriate materials would ensure that the proposal would make a significant contribution to the character of the Conservation Area.

4. Impact upon the amenity of neighbouring residents

During the course of the application, the proposals have been amended to prevent overlooking of a private garden area to the south of Snowdenham Lane. An objection has been received, regarding the possible loss of privacy that might result from the proposed dormer windows to the range of cottages fronting onto Snowdenham Lane. However, it is officers’ opinion that the level of screening afforded by existing vegetation would prevent any demonstrable harm being caused to the amenity of existing properties south of Snowdenham Lane. These trees would be protected by a landscape management plan and by virtue of their location within the Conservation Area.

Concern has also been received regarding loss of privacy from windows directly abutting the highway. Amended plans have been received to ensure that these windows are obscure glazed.

5. Archaeology

During the course of these applications, the appointed archaeologists have carried out both a desk-top study and field excavations to fully investigate the impact of the proposals upon any archaeology on the site. The field excavations revealed only 19th century workings that were likely to have been dug at a similar time to the original construction of the hotel. It would appear that the construction of the hotel eliminated any archaeological remains that may have existed at the time. It is therefore concluded that the proposed works would not cause any harm to archaeology and this has been confirmed by the County Archaeologist.

6. Highway issues

Concern has been raised with regard to a proposed new pedestrian access from the site onto Snowdenham Lane. The concerns raised relate to a possible pedestrian/vehicle conflict and the impact of this path on existing trees. This proposal has now been omitted from the application.

The proposal includes the provision of 37 car spaces which equates to 1.85 car spaces per unit, which is within the standard adopted by the Council and is accepted by the County Highway Authority.

Conclusions

On the evidence and independent advice obtained, it is officers' opinion that the redevelopment of the site including the retention of a hotel use, and which would be appropriate to the planning constraints of the site, is very unlikely. Because of the prominence of the site within the centre of the village and Conservation Area, it is considered by officers that, given the unlikelihood of an acceptable hotel redevelopment taking place, the change of use in the manner proposed is accepted.

Recommendation

A.2 WA01/0612

That subject:-

(1) to the Council's Solicitor being satisfied that the land identified in Annexe 2 can be transferred to the Council or a nominated Registered Social Landlord without any encumbrance; and

(2) the applicant entering into an appropriate legal agreement within six months and at the applicant’s expense, to require the transfer of the said land to the Council or a Registered Social Landlord of the Council's choosing prior to the commencement of any development,

then permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1. Standard Levels (4.2)

2. Standard Approval of materials (4.4)

3. Standard Obscure Glazing (3.8) - *(those windows identified on the approved plans)

4. Standard Surfacing Materials (4.5)

5. Standard No New Windows (11.3) - *(walls or roof slope) *(south elevation to Snowdenham Lane)

6. Standard Restriction on external lights (21.1)

7. Standard Sample Panels of Materials (23.20)

8. Standard Details (23.25) - *(1:10) *(windows, doors, eaves, chimneys and bargeboards) *((a) (b) (c) (I))

9. Standard Tree Survey (25.1)

10. Standard Tree Protection (25.2)

11. Standard Services (25.4)

12. Standard Landscape Scheme (25.9)

13. Standard Landscape Works Implementation (25.10)

14. Standard Landscape Management Plan (25.12)

15. Standard On Site Permanent Parking (H14) - *(a, b, c, d)

16. Standard Construction Related Loading and Parking (H15) - *(a, b, c)

17. Surface water source control measures shall be carried out in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences.

Reasons

1 – 2. Standard (RC10)

3. Standard (RC4) - *(amenities of nearby properties) *(delete 2 and 3) *(DE1) *(D1 and D4)

4. Standard (RC10)

5. Standard (RC4) - *(amenities of nearby properties) *(delete 2 and 3) *(DE1) *(D1 and D4)

6 - 7. Standard (RC10)

8. Standard (RC4) - *(special architectural and historic interest of the Conservation Area) *(PE12) *( ) *( ) *( )

9 - 14. Standard (RC4) - *(long-term health of trees and to protect the character of the area) *(delete 2 and 3) *(DE1) *(D1 and D4)

15 - 16. Standard (HR1)

17. To prevent the increased risk of flooding and to improve water quality.

Informative

1. Standard (HF7)

2. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is currently required for any discharge of sewage or trade effluent onto or into ground and for surface run-off into groundwater. Such consent may be withheld. If there is an existing discharge consent, the applicant should ensure that any increase in volume is permitted under the present conditions.

A.3 WA01/0613

Conservation Area Consent be GRANTED subject to the following condition:-

1. Standard Building Contract to Carry Out Redevelopment (24.1)

Reason

1. Standard (RC28)

* * * * *

EASTERN 32

SCHEDULE ‘B’ TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
EASTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
27TH FEBRUARY 2002

Applications where the considerations involved are clearly defined.

Background Papers

(DoPD)

The implications for crime, disorder and community safety have been appraised in the following applications, but it is not considered that any consideration of that type arises unless it is specifically referred to in a particular report.

B.1	WA02/0083 Paul Hunt Developments Limited 21.01.02	Erection of two dwellings following demolition of existing dwelling at 11 Firs Avenue, Bramley
	Grid Reference:	E: 501172 N: 144993

	Parish:	Bramley
	Ward:	Bramley
	Development Plan:	MGB (within village settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	Recommend condition and informative
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	Not yet received – to be reported orally
	Representations:	One letter of strong objection from the Bramley Village Society. Represents a severe overdevelopment of the site, quite apart from intrusion of the privacy of the neighbouring properties. Two letters of objection from local residents: 1. overdevelopment; 2. overcongestion; 3. overlooking and loss of privacy; 4. overshadowing; 5. access over land in private ownership; 6. out of keeping with character of road; 7. new dwellings would be close to public sewer.

Description of Site/Background

No. 11 is a detached bungalow of 91 sq m situated on the north side of Firs Avenue. The bungalow is situated on the right-hand side of its plot.

The Proposal

Full permission is sought for the erection of two linked detached three-bedroomed houses on the site. Each house would have a floor area of some 130 sq m. As part of the development, it is also proposed to install a new vehicular crossover onto Firs Avenue. This would cross a roadside verge of about 4 m in width.

The plot of land has a frontage to Firs Avenue of 24 m and a depth of 18.5 m. There is a mature hedge along the frontage of the site.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE10, RU1, MT2 and MT5

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 – Policies SE3, DN2 and DN3

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – Policies DE1, MV8 and MV9

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies D1, D4, RD1, M2 and M15

Main Planning Issues

The main issues to be considered are the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, its effect on the amenities of neighbours and any highway implications.

The officers consider that the proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site and to be unacceptable. The objections raised by the Bramley Village Society and local residents are also shared by the officers.

The plot is modest in size and a single bungalow would be replaced by two houses. The proposed houses would have a rear garden depth of between 6 m and 6.5 m and there would be little space between the proposed houses and their boundaries – for example, there would be only a distance of 1 m – 2 m to the side common boundaries. Given the forward position of the proposed houses, it is considered that the development would appear dominant in the general streetscene, particularly from the Barton Road direction.

The officers consider that the immediate neighbours would be adversely affected by the proposal. It is considered that the flank walls of the proposed houses would appear dominant and overbearing when viewed from the rear gardens of “The Retreat” and “Lynwood”. It is also considered that the proposed development would lead to the direct overlooking of the rear garden of Barton Lodge to the north (a bungalow) and towards the rear aspect of Lynwood adjacent.

It is considered that the development proposed would be out-of-keeping with the character of the area and to represent an unneighbourly form of development.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Standard overdevelopment (R2.11) *1(PE10) *2(SE3) *3(DE1) *4(D1, D4 and RD1)

* * * * *

B.2	WA01/2160 Mr and Mrs P Townsend 12.11.01	Erection of extensions at 15 Mount Road, Cranleigh (as amplified by letters received 21.1.02 and 4.2.02)

	Grid Reference	E: 506421 N: 138823

	Parish:	Cranleigh
	Ward:	Cranleigh East
	Development Plan:	No site specific policies (within the developed area –Replacement Local Plan
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	No objection
	Representations:	One letter of objection has been received, based on the following grounds:- 1. sunlight currently passes through the gap between the properties and reaches the neighbour’s north facing garden. There will be a loss of light; 2. the proposal will affect the layout of buildings in the streetscape, closing the separation between the properties at first floor level; 3. the proposed window at first floor level at the rear will increase overlooking of the back garden and reduce privacy; 4. there is a concern with respect to the existing foundations of the garage, particularly as the ground is of clay. A further letter received on 22nd January 2002, indicated that the same neighbours did not feel particularly strongly about the issue of overlooking/loss of privacy and would not want the application to be refused on these grounds alone. The main grounds for objection are loss of light and layout and density of buildings.

Relevant History

WA76/1082	Erection of garage	Permitted 02.09.76

WA78/0690	Alterations and ground floor extension to form utility room, alterations and extension to first floor to form bedroom with bathroom en-suite	Permitted 16.08.78

Background

The Committee considered the application at the meeting of 30th January 2002, when it decided to defer the matter in order to consider the further letter of objection.

Description of site

The property is situated within the settlement area of Cranleigh, approximately 400 metres south west of the town centre and approximately 100 metres east of the Horsham Road. Mount Street is a residential street which is tightly knit in built form, with both semi-detached and detached two storey dwellings. The property is developed with a two storey detached face brick dwelling and an attached flat roofed garage to the side.

The Proposal

The applicants propose to convert the garage area into a playroom and construct a first floor bedroom over the garage measuring approximately 22 sq m. A conservatory measuring approximately 21 square metres is proposed to be erected to the rear.

A further letter of amplification has been received which indicates that, with the space between the buildings, the separating wall, the variable differences in frontages and, above all, the complete difference in the finished construction, there would not be a terracing effect on the street.

Relevant Policies

Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan (1994) and Policy SE3 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) (2001)

Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (1993) and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) (1999)

Main Planning Issues and Assessment

The main planning issues are considered to be the effect on the streetscape and the effect on neighbouring amenity.

1. The affect on the streetscape

The street is characterised by two storey dwellings with spaces between dwellings which are at least 1 metre in width. It is considered that the impact of a two storey structure less than half a metre from the neighbouring building would disrupt the spacing between buildings in this street. The impact of additional bulk and massing of buildings close to one another is ameliorated to an extent by the setback of the proposal at first floor level. The applicants have also stated in their letter of amplification that the complete difference in finished construction would ensure that there is not a terracing affect on the street. It is also noted that the Parish Council has no objection to the proposal.

2. Neighbouring Amenity

It is considered that the first floor rear window, which is proposed less than a metre from the boundary with the neighbouring property, would further reduce the privacy of the garden area of the adjacent dwelling. It is noted however that the objector in a letter received on 22nd January 2002 does not feel particularly strongly about this issue and does not consider that this reason should lead to refusal of the application in and of itself.

The neighbour has also objected on the grounds of the reduction of light to the garden area. In this respect the neighbours windows do not face the proposal and are north facing. It is not considered that there is a loss of light which would sustain refusal of the application.

It is also considered that there would be no material affect on neighbouring amenity from the conservatory proposed.

Conclusion

The provision of additional information from the applicant supports an argument that any adverse impact on the street scene would be ameliorated by design and use of materials. The applicant has reduced the case in respect of adverse impacts of overlooking. It is noted that the Parish Council has no objection to the proposal. It is considered that it would now be difficult to sustain refusal of the application.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition:-

1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

Reason

1. Standard (RC12) - *(Insert 1 “Policy PE10”) *(Insert 2 “Policy SE3”) *(Insert 3 “Policy DE1”) *(Insert 4 “Policies D1 and D4”)

* * * * *

B.3	WA01/2467 Mr & Mrs Scriven 31.12.01	Erection of extensions and alterations at Drury House, Pitch Hill, Ewhurst
	Grid Reference:	E: 508047 N: 142283

	Parish:	Ewhurst
	Ward:	Ewhurst
	Development Plan:	MGB, AONB, AGLV (outside village settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	The Council objects strongly to this revised application and our reasons remain much the same as previously. Substantial development, inappropriate within the Green Belt, AONB and AGLV. Further excavation on the site is totally unacceptable. However, there is no objection to the proposed dormer to match existing. There are still outstanding matters from a previous application and we would wish to see the work completed satisfactorily before this application was even to be considered
	Representations:	Five letters of objection on the following grounds: 1. degrade character of area; 2. should be no further development until other outstanding issues resolved; 3. loss of cupressus trees; 4. overlooking/loss of privacy; 5. affect land stability; 6. question accuracy of plans.

Relevant History

WA90/0298	Replacement of swimming pool plant room with plant and recreation room	Permitted 05.04.90 (not implemented)
WA91/1563	Erection of a detached garage	Permitted 17.02.92 (not implemented)
WA92/1061	Erection of garage and link to house	Permitted 24.09.92 (not implemented)
WA97/0875	Erection of garage and link to house (renewal of WA92/1061)	Permitted 04.08.97 (not yet implemented)
WA00/2195	Construction of retaining wall, erection of replacement boundary fence, provision of relocated entrance piers and gates	Withdrawn 30.01.01
WA01/0296	Construction of retaining wall and provision of entrance piers and gates (revision of WA00/2195)	Permitted 25.06.01
WA01/1810	Erection of extensions and alterations	Withdrawn 31.10.01

Description of Site/Background

Drury House is a detached dwelling located on the western side of Ride Way to the south of the Windmill Inn.

Ground levels fall away steeply to the west and hence the dwelling sits below the level of the road. To the frontage, there is a bank, close-boarded fence and recent conifer planting.

The Proposal

The proposal relates to the construction of a single-storey “link” and a two-storey addition at the northern end of the house. A dormer window is also to be added at second floor level on the rear (western) elevation of the house. All external materials are to match the existing dwelling.

Due to the sloping nature of the site, the front (eastern) elevation would only show the single-storey garage element. The link would be on lower ground and the flat roof used for car parking.

The gross external floor area of the existing property (including the basement of 156 sq m) is calculated at 510 sq m with accommodation on up to four floors. The gross floor area of the proposed works is as follows:

(a) single-storey “link” (family room) and underground store of 97.63 sq m;

(b) lower ground floor accommodation (bedroom, bathroom, gym) in the two-storey section of 58.86 sq m;

(c) ground floor garaging of 58.86 sq m.

The proposals would therefore have a total floor area of 215.35 sq m.

In elevational terms, the development would extend the frontage of the dwelling by 14.6 m. The two-storey element would have a height to eaves and ridge level of 5.9 m and 9 m respectively (rear elevation). On the front elevation, the ridge height would be 5.5 m.

The scheme is a variation to that given consent under planning reference WA97/0875. However, it differs in respect of the following:

(a) the single-storey “link” element is of the same width (i.e. 9.25 m) but has been increased in depth by moving the western external wall further to the rear by 1.9 m and the eastern wall further underground;

(b) the two-storey element is of the same depth (i.e. 10.9 m) but has been increased in width from 4.7 m to 5.4 m;

(c) additional storage has been created at the front which is underneath the drive;

(d) a chimney has been added on the southern elevation of the two-storey element;

(e) the front elevation of the two-storey element now “lines-up” with the existing front gabled elevation, rather than being set back.

The overall effect of the proposals, when compared to the approved scheme (reference WA97/0875), is to extend the frontage of development by a further 0.7 m and the height of the ridge over the two-storey element by 0.35 m respectively. The amount of underground space has been substantially increased however, to create a family room.

Compared to the previously withdrawn scheme, the frontage has been reduced from 16.4 m to 14.6 m (with the two-storey element being reduced in width from 6.1 m to 5.4 m) and the height of the two-storey element (front elevation) has been reduced from 6.25 m to 5.5 m. However, the total floor area has been increased from 204.7 sq m to 215.35 sq m.

Submissions in Support

The agent points out that the property has never been extended and that the percentage increase in floor area (excluding the garaging which is non-habitable accommodation) is some 31%.

The agent argues that, in terms of visual appearance, the scheme is virtually the same as that previously approved under WA97/0875. The overall appearance of the eastern elevation is virtually identical to that previously approved, apart from the removal of the jettied section on the rear at ground floor level and the agent argues that the extension is subservient to the existing dwelling.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE2 and PE7

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 – Policies LO6 and SE6

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – Policies GB1, RE1 and HS7

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan – Policies C1, C3 and RD2

Main Planning Issues

The main issues to be considered are whether the proposal complies with the dwellings extensions policy and its impact on the character and appearance of the area.

The property is located in countryside where there is strict control over new development. Government guidance as set out in PPG Note 2 “Green Belts” and Development Plan policies do allow for the limited extension of existing dwellings.

The officers note that this proposal is, in effect, a revision of the scheme approved in 1997 (reference WA97/0875) and have also noted the arguments put forward by the agent. There have also been reductions in the overall width and height of the extension compared to the previously withdrawn proposal.

Your officers consider that this revised proposal would still represent significant additions to the existing dwelling. In floor area terms, the proposal would represent an overall increase of 42% but, excluding the garaging, this increase would be 31%. In addition, a significant amount of the floorspace would be at lower ground level.

The proposed development would clearly have an impact on the site and result in a spread of development across the site. Whilst there would be an increase in floorspace over the consented scheme, the question arises as to what additional visual impact this proposal would have on the openness of the Green Belt and the landscape character of the area. The officers take the view that any additional visual impact would be minimal and that the revised scale, height and form of extension would be more acceptable and subservient to the existing dwelling compared to the previous withdrawn proposal.

In landscape terms, despite the fall in ground levels, the dwelling and proposed extension would be visible from the highway and the wider landscape. The proposed building is particularly visible from the north and, with the removal of some cupressus trees to the side of the extension (as indicated in the original submission), would make the extension more intrusive from this direction and from some residential properties to the north-west. In your officers’ view, the retention of these trees is considered to be important to help screen the development. The proposed extension would more or less cover the existing car parking area and these trees could be retained. This issue has been taken up with the applicant.

The officers have also sought a reduction in the floor area of the development so that it falls within the 40% extensions policy guideline.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the officers consider the scale and form of this revised proposal to be more acceptable. Bearing in mind the previous consent in 1997, the officers do not consider that this proposal would cause material harm to the Green Belt or the landscape.

Recommendation

That, subject to the receipt of satisfactory revised plans and further information in relation to trees, permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard matching materials (4.3)

2. Standard use of garage (3.9)

3. Standard ancillary use (9.7) *(extension) *(Drury House)

4. Standard tree survey (25.1)

5. Standard tree protection (25.2)

6. Standard levels and construction details (25.3)

Reasons

1. Standard (RC4) *(the character and amenities of the area) *(PE2 and PE7) *(LO6 and SE6) *(GB1 and RE1) *(C1 and C3)

2 & 3. Standard (RC9) *(the restrictive policies which apply in this area) *(PE2) *(LO6) *(GB1) *(C1)

4 – 6. Standard (RC4) *(the long-term health of the trees concerned and in order to protect the character of the area) *(PE7) *(SE6) *(RE1) *(C3)

* * * * *

B.4	WA01/2372 Barnett Hill Conference Centre 10.12.01	Additional use of bedroom accommodation (currently used as ancillary to main use of premises for conference and training purposes) as ancillary to approved additional use of premises for weddings and receptions at Barnett Hill Conference Centre, Blackheath Lane, Wonersh
	Grid Reference:	E: 502494 N: 145540

	Parish:	Wonersh
	Ward:	Blackheath and Wonersh
	Development Plan:	MGB, AGLV, Grade II listed building (outside settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	No objection

Representations:

One letter of objection has been received, based on the following grounds:

1. additional noise impact, particularly at weekends;

2. additional traffic impact, including lorries and coaches, particularly at weekends.

Relevant History

WA83/0366	Erection of a two-storey extension to provide twelve bedrooms with en-suite bedroom; construction of a detached boiler/ generator house	Permitted 28.04.83
WA86/2123	Application for Listed Building Consent for erection of a two-storey extension to provide twelve bedrooms	Permitted 11.02.87
WA98/0754	Provision of additional car parking area	Permitted 10.09.98
WA01/1656	Additional use of premises for weddings and receptions	Permitted (Temporary) 01.11.01

Description of site

The property is situated in the Green Belt and countryside approximately 500 m east of the settlement area of Wonersh and is accessed from the narrow Blackheath Lane. The nearest residential dwelling is more than 240 m away. The main Grade II Listed Building measures approximately 1084 sq m in ground coverage. In total there are approximately 54 bedrooms. The buildings are set within grounds of approximately 4 ha and there are approximately 72 parking bays and spaces. 50 bays are generally accessible for public parking.

The Proposal

Prior to 2001, the applicants had permission for the use of the premises for training and conference purposes. Use of the accommodation was ancillary to the use for training purposes. In 2001, the applicants received permission for the temporary additional use of the premises for weddings and receptions (WA01/1656).

The applicants now seek to lift the restriction on the use of the existing accommodation so as to include accommodation in association with weddings and receptions.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan (1994) – Policies PE1, PE7, MT2, PE12 and DP23

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) (2001) – Policies LO6, SE6, DN2, DN15 and SE4

Waverley Borough Local Plan (1993) – Policies GB1, RE1, C10, MU8 and C7

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999 – Policies C1, C3, D1, HE4, LT2, LT4 and M2

Main Planning Issues and Assessment

The main planning issues are the traffic impact on Blackheath Lane and the effect on the neighbouring amenity.

In respect of the first issue, the County Highways Authority advises that there are no highway requirements. Additional use of the accommodation in association with the permission granted for weddings and receptions is not considered in and of itself to increase traffic to a degree which would be detrimental to the traffic capacity of the road network or safety of users.

In respect of the second issue, the accommodation is situated approximately 240 m from the nearest dwelling and approximately 300 m from the neighbouring objector’s property. Any noise nuisance would therefore be more likely to be associated with traffic than with accommodation.

The direction of traffic, and hence effects of traffic noise, is likely to come predominantly from the west. The objector’s dwelling is approximately 50 m north-east of the access to the Barnett Hill Conference Centre. The Conference Centre has permission to function for training/conferences and weddings and receptions and there is existing traffic linked to these activities.

It is considered that providing an option for guests attending weddings and receptions to stay in the on-site accommodation would not significantly change the number or nature of vehicles accessing the property. It is therefore considered that an objection based on noise nuisance is not sustainable.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED.

* * * * *

B.5	WA01/2468 Mr M Hills 31.12.01	Construction of dormer windows for loft conversion with erection of a porch at 17 New Road, Wonersh (as amended by letter and plans received on 12.02.02)
	Grid Reference:	E: 501916 N: 145522

	Parish:	Wonersh
	Ward:	Blackheath and Wonersh
	Development Plan:	Green Belt; (within the settlement area – Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	There is particular concern with regard to new dormers to the front which are not considered to be compatible with the street scene. There is also concern about potential overlooking of neighbours’ properties. The proposal is also considered to be very unattractive in design and they object.

Representations:

Two letters of objection have been received, based on the following grounds:
1. loss of privacy as a result of overlooking;

2. affect on the property value as a result of being overlooked.

Relevant History

WA97/0389

Erection of a single-storey extension

Permitted
28.04.97

Description of site

The property is situated in the settlement area of Wonersh in a row of narrow plots developed with detached dwellings, predominantly bungalows. A detached bungalow has been developed on the property. The dwelling has benefited from a previous extension to the rear.

The Proposal

The applicant proposes to develop a room in the roof measuring approximately 22 sq m and seeks approval for two dormer windows projecting to front and rear. The amended plan shows the dormers to project by approximately 1.4 m to the front and rear. The dormers are set down from the roof ridge by approximately 0.2 m. The width of the dormers measure approximately 1.3 m.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE2 and RU1

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 – Policies LO6 and LO4

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – Policies GB1, RS1 and DE1

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999 – Policies C1, RD1, D1 and D4

Main Planning Issues and Assessment

The main planning issues are whether the proposal protects or enhances the appearance of the street scene and visual character of the area and whether there would be an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.

In respect of the first issue, it is considered that the height and positioning of the dormers, in side view, unbalances the roof profile. When viewed from the street, the proposals are not considered to protect or enhance the streetscape and do not protect the visual character of the area. There is a concern that an undesirable precedent may be set should the proposal be permitted.

In respect of the second issue of neighbouring amenity, it is noted that the objectors’ properties are situated on the eastern side of the street opposite the dwelling. There is a distance of greater than 25 m between the proposed front/eastern facing dormer and the dwellings on the other side of the street. It is not considered that there would be an adverse impact in respect of overlooking.

The rear dormer would overlook the garden of the neighbour. However, there are other instances in the street where rear dormers have the same degree of overlooking and the resulting harm is not considered to be demonstrable.

Conclusion

It is considered that the proposals do not protect or enhance the streetscape and do not protect the visual character of the area. The application is consequently recommended for refusal.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

1. The height and positioning of the dormers, in side view, unbalances the roof profile. When viewed from the street, the proposals are not considered to protect or enhance the streetscape or protect the visual character of the area. The proposals therefore conflict with Policy RU1 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy LO4 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, Policies RS1 and DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

* * * * *

B.6	WA02/0040 English Villages Housing Association 14.01.02	Erection of five dwellings following demolition of existing garages at Garage Compound, The Glebe, Ewhurst
	Grid Reference:	E: 509179 N: 140632

	Parish:	Ewhurst
	Ward:	Ewhurst
	Development Plan:	No site specific polices (within settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	Recommends conditions
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	Not yet received – to be reported orally
	Consultations:	Environmental Health - recommend condition relating to construction times
	Representations:	Two letters of objection have been received on the following grounds: 1. loss of privacy; 2. buildings should be bungalows only; 3. loss of rear access and parking; 4. loss of right of way.

Description of Site/Background

The site comprises 0.135 hectares of land to the north and rear of properties on The Glebe, Ewhurst. The site currently comprises a concrete hardstand with a line of brick flat roof garages along its southern boundary. The site is enclosed by a mixture of fencing, walls and vegetation.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of five dwellings for subsidised affordable housing, comprising a terrace of two two-bedroomed houses, a two-bedroomed bungalow and a pair of two-bedroomed bungalows.

Submissions in Support

A supporting statement has been submitted by the Rural Housing Trust. This states that a housing needs survey has been undertaken in partnership with the Parish Council, which has established that there is a clear need for these five dwellings.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 - Policy RU1

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 - Policy LO4

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 - Policies RS1, HS2 and DE1

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan - Policies RD1, H4, H5, D1 and D4

Main Planning Issues

The principal planning issues are considered to be:

1. Principle of development

2. Impact upon neighbouring amenity

3. Impact upon character of the area

The site is located within the settlement boundary of Ewhurst where the principle of further residential development is considered acceptable. In addition, the site has already been developed upon and is therefore considered to be a brownfield site. The supporting statement by the Rural Housing Trust identifies the high level of need for affordable housing within the Ewhurst area.

Concern has been raised with regard to a potential loss of privacy to existing residents that may result from the proposed two-storey dwellings. However, the boundary immediately to the north of these dwellings is defined by high conifer hedging and it is considered that there is sufficient distance to the dwellings to the south for there not to be harm caused.

The proposed development is a mixture of two and single-storey dwellings which reflects the character of the area.

Recommendation

Subject to the applicants entering into an appropriate legal agreement within six months of the date of this resolution, at the applicants’ expense, to ensure that the proposed development remains low-cost housing for occupation by local people, permission be GRANTED subject to:

1. Standard approval of materials (4.4)

2. Standard no new windows (11.3) *(wall) *(north and south)

3. Standard access (H8)

4. Standard parking (H14) *(a, d)

5. Standard construction vehicles (H15)

Reasons

1. Standard (RC10)

2. Standard (RC4) *(amenities of neighbouring properties) *(delete 2 and 3) *(DE1) *(D1 and D4)

3 – 5. Standard (HR1)

Informative

1. H(Inf)13

2. H(Inf)7

* * * * *

B.7	WA02/0064 Mr G Brown 14.01.02	Erection of an agricultural dwelling (details pursuant to outline consent granted under WA00/1754) on land at Manzel Nurseries, Guildford Road, Shamley Green
	Grid Reference:	E: 504149 N: 142258

	Parish:	Wonersh
	Ward:	Shamley Green
	Development Plan:	MGB, AGLV (outside settlement boundary – Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	My members are very concerned about the proposed location of this new bungalow in this very sensitive area. It appears that the owners are extending the built-up area along the whole of the length of the road. A position closer to the gate entrance would aid with control of access/security and be less inconvenient to postal and other utility services/visitors and reps and also be less intrusive in this special location. They also consider that the actual size of the property given in the application is too large. For example, is it necessary to have such a large office for such a small enterprise and why does the fact that a father and son share the property, necessitate having more than one guest room? We also consider that it is unacceptable to throw in the garage area into the property area since, at some time in the future, an application for the building of a garage is inevitable and therefore the
		building size should be reduced accordingly. Finally, no details of landscaping arrangements and tree planting has been given. We therefore wish to lodge an objection to the present proposals.
	Representations:	One letter of objection from the Shamley Green Village Society with concerns relating to the size of the property, its sensitive location, office area should be agriculture only, landscaping should include hedging.

Relevant History

WA88/2504	Erection of a store for agriculture and forestry equipment and materials	Permitted Development
WA89/2339	Construction of lake	Permitted 30.09.91
WA90/1834	Outline application for the erection of bungalow to be used as an agricultural dwelling and detached garage	Refused 18.03.91
WA96/1307	Retention of a mobile home for a temporary period of three years for occupation by an agricultural worker	Permitted 07.02.97
WA96/1308	Erection of an agricultural building	Refused 07.02.97
WA97/0523	Erection of a deer barn for the overwintering of livestock	Refused 17.07.97 Allowed 23.01.98
WA00/1754	Outline application for the erection of an agricultural dwelling	Permitted 11.07.01

Description of Site/Background

Manzel Nurseries is an agricultural holding of about 10.5 ha situated on the west side of the Guildford Road to the north of Rowly. The holding includes a deer farm with four deer paddocks covering about 3.6 ha, a nursery with conifer beds extending to about 1 ha, a field laid to grass for hay-making and an irrigation lake. The remainder of the land is used mainly as farm yard, parking areas and for buildings. The buildings comprise a hay barn of about 162 sq m, a deer barn of about 468 sq m, an implement barn of about 460 sq m and a number of polytunnels. Also on the site is a mobile home. A further 25.3 ha of land is rented for grassland.

The Proposal

Outline planning permission was granted in July 2001 for the erection of an agricultural dwelling. This application seeks permission for details pursuant to that permission. The details of this application are for a four-bedroomed bungalow of 175 sq m constructed with brick walls and tiled roof.

Submissions in Support

The applicant states that planning permission was granted for a 175 sq m property, including garaging. They have decided not to have a garage and to use the additional garage area in the property. The property has been designed with four bedrooms because father and son share the same property. The access is to be as existing farm and landscaping will be in the form of new tree planting.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE2 and PE7

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001 – Policy SE6

Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 – Policies GB1 and RE1

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999 – Policies C1, C3 and RD11

Main Planning Issues

The principle of a new agricultural dwelling has been established by the granting of WA00/1754. The principal issue is whether the details of the proposal are acceptable in relation to the impact on the landscape character of the area and openess of the Green Belt.

Permission WA00/1754 was granted subject to a condition that the new dwelling should not have a floor area greater than 175 sq m. The applicants have submitted that, because the building will be occupied by father and son, with the possibility in the future that the son may have a family, a dwelling of this size, with four bedrooms is required. It is officers’ opinion that, given that the proposed building is single-storey, the amount of floor area proposed would not have any detrimental impact upon the character of the area. The location of the building has already been established by the previous outline planning permission.

The proposal excludes any form of garaging, which could have been included in the 175 sq m limit set by the outline permission. The applicants should be aware that, given the amount of floor area proposed, the Council is unlikely to consider favourably any application for garaging in the future.

It is intended that the dwelling would be accessed from the existing farm access. No objection has been received from the County Highway Authority with regard to this matter.

Concern has been raised with regard to the lack of proposed landscaping to screen the proposed building. The site is very well screened to the east, towards the highway, by a tall tree and hedge boundary. Officers share the concern raised with regard to any visual impact to the north and west and it is officers’ opinion that there is a need to provide a permanent and clear boundary to the site. It is therefore proposed that the applicants are required to provide an indigenous hedge to the northern and western boundaries of the site.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard approval of materials (4.4)

2. Standard landscaping scheme (25.9) *(insert after "landscaping scheme" in first sentence - "including a new hedge along the northern and western boundaries of the site")

Reasons

1 & 2. Standard (RC4) *(character and amenities of the area) *(PE7) *(LO5) *(RE1) *(C3)

Informative

1. Having regard to Policy GB1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan, it is unlikely that the Local Planning Authority would be willing to consider favourably any proposals for domestic garaging on this site.

* * * * *

EASTERN 36

SCHEDULE 'C' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
EASTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
27TH FEBRUARY 2002

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

Background Papers (DoPD)

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

Plan No. Applicant	Development Proposed Site Description	Decision
WA01/1964 W E A Mowe	Erection of a first floor extension to existing bungalow to provide a two-storey dwelling at Pendene, Barton Road, Bramley	GRANTED
WA01/2200 Mr & Mrs Rapley	Erection of a single-storey extension and conservatory at 51 Summerlands, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2234 D A J & A J Swain	Erection of stables, tack room and hay store following demolition of existing stables and construction of a sand school for private recreational equestrian purposes on land adjacent to Gorebridge House, Hookhouse Lane, Loxhill, Godalming	GRANTED
WA01/2235 C S Jobson	Erection of a boundary wall/fence together with alterations to elevations (as amended by additional information received 29.11.01 and by letter and plan received 24.01.02) at Timbers, Guildford Road, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA01/2236 C S Jobson	Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a boundary wall/fence together with alterations to elevations (as amended by additional information received on 29.11.01 and by letter and plan received 24.01.02) at Timbers, Guildford Road, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA01/2237 P Ringrose	Erection of a single-storey extension following demolition of existing workshop at 3 Park Gate Cottages, The Common, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2249 Mr & Mrs Skinner	Erection of a replacement porch extension at The White House, Knightons Lane, Upper Ifold, Dunsfold	GRANTED
WA01/2257 J L McGuffog	Erection of a conservatory at Hillfield, Amlets Lane, Cranleigh	GRANTED

WA01/2290 Mr & Mrs ten Hope	Erection of two, two-storey extensions at Hilliards House, Amlets Lane, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2337 Mr & Mrs Fisher	Erection of a single-storey extension following demolition of an existing single-storey extension at Meadows Edge, 1 Lords Hill Cottages, Lords Hill Common, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA01/2346 P Hutley	Erection of a first floor extension at Honeymead Barn, Gate Street, Bramley (revision of WA01/0742)	GRANTED
WA01/2347 N Howard	Erection of a conservatory at Nestcott, Chiddingfold Road, Dunsfold	GRANTED
WA01/2352 Hurtwood Rural Industries Limited	Erection of two detached single garages and provision of a new access at 2 Beaver Cottages, Smithwood Common, Cranleigh (revision of WA01/1520)	GRANTED
WA01/2358 Mr A B & P A Reed	Application for Certificate of Lawfulness under Section 192 for a proposed use; use of garage and workshop currently ancillary to Pound Farm as a dwelling to become ancillary to Pound Farm Lodge at Pound Farm Lodge, Guildford Road, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA01/2362 Mr & Mrs Willcox	Erection of extensions and alterations at 1 Copse Edge, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2373 Mr & Mrs Golton	Erection of extensions and alterations at The Cottage, The Common, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2387 S King & P Smith	Erection of a detached double garage/store at Woodhill Manor, Woodhill Lane, Shamley Green (revision of WA01/1658)	GRANTED
WA01/2388 D Bryant & Z Taylor	Erection of a single-storey extension and porch following demolition of existing conservatory at 11 Clappers Meadow, Alfold	GRANTED
WA01/2393 Mr & Mrs Johnson	Erection of extensions and alterations to elevation at Rectory Cottage, Rosemary Lane, Alfold	GRANTED
WA01/2406 M J Greening	Construction of a vehicular access at 1 Broadhurst Cottages, Smithwood Common, Cranleigh	GRANTED
WA01/2417 Mr & Mrs Stern	Erection of a conservatory at Trenans, Barhatch Lane, Cranleigh	GRANTED

WA01/2442 Mr & Mrs Wright	Erection of extensions and alterations (as amended by letter dated 08.02.02 and plans received 11.02.02) at Munstead Park House, Munstead Heath Road, Bramley	GRANTED
WA01/2446 Mr & Mrs Punter	Erection of a single-storey extension at 9 Lords Hill Cottages, Lords Hill Common, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA01/2457 P Milner	Erection of a single-storey extension and a conservatory following demolition of existing conservatory at 17 Nursery Hill, Shamley Green	GRANTED
WA02/0001 Surrey County Council	Excavation and removal of waste from a closed landfill site with restoration at a lower level using inert infill material. Construction of a temporary access onto the A281 and associated infrastructure including: offices; weighbridge; wheelwash; leachate holding tank; gas flare on land at Smithbrook Kilns Business Park, Horsham Road, Bramley	NO OBJECTION

* * * * *

EASTERN 39

SCHEDULE "D" TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
EASTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
27TH FEBRUARY 2002

Applications which are County Matters in accordance with Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980.

Background Papers (DoPD)

Unless stated otherwise there are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to any of the following reports.

D.1	WA01/2339 RMC Environmental Services Ltd 10.12.01	Details of restoration pursuant to Conditions 8 and 11 of planning permission GU/R/1712 dated February 1952, Conditions 8 and 10 of planning permission HM/R 12464 dated 16.03.64 and Conditions 7 and 9 of planning permission HM/R 14992 dated 29.09.65 at Woodhill Quarry, Woodhill Lane, Shamley Green (as amplified by plans received 14.02.02 and stability report dated 14.05.01)
	Grid Reference:	E: 504490 N: 144114

	Parish:	Wonersh
	Ward:	Shamley Green
	Development Plan:	MGB, AONB, AGLV (outside settlement boundary - Replacement Local Plan)
	Highway Authority:	No requirements
	Drainage Authority:	No requirements
	Parish Council:	We have now received direct from Surrey County Council a copy of proposals put forward by RMC Aggregates to carry out certain restoration arrangements to this area and which appears to be in accordance with the contents of this planning application. The Council welcomes the environmental solution being proposed in these plans and which we trust will now end once and for all any proposals to use this area as a rubbish tip. My Council would also like to be consulted about the adjacent bridlepath when the time comes and also about any proposed aftercare management scheme with the County Council.
	Consultations:	Cranleigh Parish Council – Members requested that the Chairman should send a letter of support to Surrey County Council expressing that whilst we have no objection and welcome the proposals, we would wish to be assured that this is a final solution to the matter and that the site will not be used for further excavations or landfill.
	Representations:	None received

Relevant History

HM/R 12464	Extension to existing sand pit	Permitted 16.03.61
HM/R 14992	Extension of area for winning of sand	Permitted 09.02.65
WA78/0790	Importation of material and infilling with sand to form a sub-base material	Refused 13.12.78
WA85/0133	Winning and working of sand from an area of 4.9 hectares and restoration to woodland	Refused 29.07.85
WA88/1711	Infilling and restoration pursuant to Condition 11 of HM/R 1712, Condition 10 of HM/R 12464 and Condition 9 of HM/R 14992	Withdrawn
WA91/0467	Scheme of infilling and restoration (details pursuant to Condition 10 of HM/R 12464 and Condition 9 of HM/R 14992)	Withdrawn
WA97/0590	Scheme of infilling and restoration pursuant to Condition 10 of HM/R 12464 and Condition 9 of HM/R 14992)	Objection 11.06.97

Introduction

The Borough Council has been consulted on the above application, which provides details of the restoration scheme for the site and has been submitted pursuant to conditions attached to application references HM/R 12464 and HM/R 14992.

Attached at Annexe B is a copy of the initial report of the County Planning Officer. This provides further details of the history relating to this site and a description of the proposal.

Since the original submission, the applicant has also submitted a report and plan details in respect of the stability of the northern slope of the site.

Description of Site/Location

Woodhill Sand Pit lies � of a mile to the east of Shamley Green, on the boundary with Guildford Borough and has a site area of 5.7 hectares (14 acres). Part of the pit and the access lie within Guildford Borough. Prior to quarrying commencing before the war, the land formed part of an elongated ridge feature. To the north is an area of woodland and to the south of the site is abutted by a ribbon of trees beyond which is grazing land. The nearest dwelling lies approximately 200 m to the south-east. A public bridleway passes along the northern boundary of the site.

Main Planning Issues

The main issues to be considered are whether the proposal submitted meets the terms and scope of the relevant conditions and whether the landscaping scheme is appropriate to the site and the surrounding area.

In your officers’ view, the proposal would appear to represent an acceptable solution for this site. The proposal consists of a low level restoration, with some regrading, although no additional material would be imported on to the site. Further information has been submitted on how the applicant intends to deal with the instability on part of the northern slope of the quarry.

In landscape terms, the site is located in a sensitive area, being within the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of Great Landscape Value. The quarry is visible from parts of the Public Bridleway to the north. The approach taken to restore the site would seem to be appropriate to the area and to enhance the site.

The officers have noted the comments of both the Wonersh Parish Council and Cranleigh Parish Council who generally welcome the proposals.

However, there are a number of points of concern which the officers would like the County to consider. It is important that there is to be no importation of material to the site. It is also suggested that the site could be made open to the public as an amenity facility and that Guildford Borough be requested to seek action to remove the existing structures at the entrance to the site and to ensure that no further unauthorised commercial uses take place.

Recommendation

That the County Planning Officer be informed that this Council raises NO OBJECTION to the proposal provided that there is no importation of material to the site.

* * * * *