Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 14 December 2016.

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 December 2016 were approved as a correct record.

To receive any disclosures of interest from councillors under the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, or contact with applicants/objectors under the Planning Code.

a) Disclosures of interest under the Members’ Code of Conduct

There were none.

b) Declarations of interest under the Council’s Planning Code

Councillors R.A. Smith Ainsley, H.A. Thomson, R.O. Barratt, R. Chandler, S. Doran, M.P.C. Francis, C.Frazer and R.W. Sider BEM, reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application 16/00972/FUL - Former Brooklands College, Church Road, Ashford, TW15 2XD - but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views and had kept an open mind. Councillor N. Gething reported that he had also received correspondence in relation to application 16/00972/FUL and had previously expressed his views in public but had kept an open mind.

Councillors R.A. Smith Ainsley, R.O. Barratt, R. Chandler, M.P.C. Francis, N. Gething and R.W. Sider BEM, reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application 16/01934/HOU - Ambleside, Penton Hall Drive, Staines-Upon-Thames - but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views and had kept an open mind.

Description:

The demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of new buildings between one and six storeys to accommodate 366 dwellings, 619 square metres of flexible commercial floor space and 442 square metres of educational floor space. The application also includes the provision of public open space and associated car parking, cycle parking, access and related infrastructure and associated works.

Additional Information:

The Assistant Head of Planning (Development Management) reported that 7 late letters of representation had been received.  Most of the issues raised were already covered in the report however the following additional issues included:

·         Strong concerns regarding the assessment and formal response from the County Highway Authority

·         Loss of amenity to 49 Meadway

·         Concern about the future maintenance of the existing trees

·         Concern about the future boundary fencing separating the new public open space and the properties in Village Way

With regard to Bullet Point 1, a copy of the letter was forwarded to the County Highway Engineer, who responded with an email which set out why he continued to consider the proposal to be acceptable. 

With regard to Bullet Point 2, it was recommended that an additional condition be imposed requiring the installation of privacy screens to prevent overlooking in relation to the neighbouring property.

With regard to Bullet Point 3, the proposed Section 106 Agreement together with Condition 39 (future tree surgery) will ensure that the existing trees are maintained to a satisfactory manner.  However, it was also recommended that an additional condition should be imposed, requiring a landscape management plan to be submitted for approval.

With regard to Bullet Point 4, it was recommended that a condition be imposed requiring details of boundary treatment to be submitted for approval.

The Assistant Head of Planning (Development Management) advised of the following corrections to the Officer’s Report:

1.    Paragraph 3.15: The total amount of private amenity space (not including balconies)for residents is some 6,386 sqm 0.66 hectares.

2.    Paragraph 3.16: The proposal will provide public space of some 19,473 sqm 1.29 hectares in total

3.    Page 37 third paragraph: The total on-site parking provision represents a shortfall of 120 128 parking spaces

The Assistant Head of Planning (Development Management) also reported that a consultation response had been received from the Victorian Society raising objection to the proposal and recommending refusal on the loss of the school building on the grounds of the unjustified loss of an historic building which would harm the character of the local area and deprive it of an heritage asset of high local importance. A consultation response had also been received from the Council’s Historic Advisor which raised no objection to the loss of the school building.

The Assistant Head of Planning (Development Management) also reported the following additional conditions:

Condition 46

Prior to the construction of the buildings hereby approved details of privacy screens to be installed on the roof terraces of 3^rd floor Unit A2.3.13 and fourth floor Unit A2.4.10 shall be submitted to and approved in writing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 310/16

Description:

The demolition of Churchill Hall and its replacement with 3 no. two storey terraced dwellings with car parking and amenity space.

Additional Information:

The Assistant Head of Planning (Development Management) reported that a consultation response had been received from the Council’s Tree Officer which raised no objection to the loss of an existing tree on the site.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Loralie Hankin spoke against the application and raised the following key points:

·         Elderly people living nearby would be affected by noise from children

·         Car parking concerns

·         Footway concerns

The Chairman used his discretion and permitted Councillor Ian Harvey to speak as Leader of the Council in favour of the application and he raised the following key points:

·The building is disused

·The dwellings will be let as affordable houses by the Council

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

·         The building is not in use

·         Traffic problems

·         Detrimental to the street scene

·         Chronic problems with the traffic system

Decision:

The application was approved as per the agenda.

Description:

The demolition of existing buildings and the erection of 12 residential units, all with associated parking, amenity space and landscaping.

Additional Information:

There was none.

Public Speaking:

There was none.

Debate:

During the debate the following key issue was raised:

·         The proposal would not adversely impact on the surrounding properties

Decision:

The application was approved as per the agenda.

Description:

The conversion of a loft to form habitable space and associated alterations.

Additional Information:

There was none.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Kevin Turner spoke for the application and raised the following key points:

·         Proposal complies with policy guidance

·         No overshadowing

The Chairman read out correspondence from Councillor Edgington who had called the application in for the Committee to determine.  The points raised were:

·         Overdevelopment

·         Loss of light on adjoining properties

·         Impact in terms of visibility on adjoining properties

Debate:

During the debate the following key issue was raised:

·         Application complies with planning guidance

Decision:

The application was approved as per the agenda.

Description:

The unauthorised erection of a building for use as a dwelling at the end of the rear garden.

Additional Information:

There was none.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Emma Andrews spoke in support of the enforcement action and raised the following key point:

·         The property will be used as a House of Multiple Occupation

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

·         The site is an on-going problem

·         Concerns over possible House of Multiple Occupation at the site

·         Action should be taken quickly

Decision:

Agreed that enforcement action should be taken as per the agenda subject to the time for compliance being amended from 6 months to 3 months.

To note details of the Planning appeals submitted and decisions received between 4 November 2016 and 26 January 2017.

The Chairman informed the Committee that if any Member had any detailed queries regarding the report on Appeals lodged and decisions received since the last meeting, they should contact the Assistant Head of Planning and Housing Strategy.

Resolved that the report of the Assistant Head of Planning and Housing Strategy be received and noted.

To consider any items which the Chairman considers as urgent.

There were none.