Minutes of the Planning Committee
29 April 2026
Present:
Councillor M. Gibson (Chair)
Councillor D.L. Geraci (Vice-Chair)
Councillors:
|
C. Bateson S.N. Beatty T. Burrell |
K. Howkins L. E. Nichols K.E. Rutherford
|
P.N. Woodward
|
|
Substitutions: |
Councillors K.M. Grant (In place of J.P. Caplin) |
|
Apologies: |
Councillors M. Buck, R. Chandler, D.C. Clarke and M.J. Lee |
|
8/26 |
Minutes
|
The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2026 were approved as a correct record.
|
9/26 |
Disclosures of Interest Under the Member's Code of Conduct
|
There were none.
|
10/26 |
Declarations of interest under the Council’s Planning Code
|
In relation to application 24/01452/OUT, Councillor Howkins reported that she had visited the site. Councillor Nichols declared that he had met with the applicant, but not in relation to this application.
In relation to application 26/00017/FUL, Councillor Howkins and Gibson reported that they had visited the site.
|
11/26 |
Planning application 24/01452/OUT - Bugle Nurseries, Upper Halliford Road, Shepperton TW17 8SN
|
Description:
Outline application with approval sought for partial approval of access (highway access and primary estate road), with details of access (secondary estate roads), scale, layout, appearance and landscaping reserved, for the demolition of existing buildings and structures and the redevelopment of the site for up to 80 residential units and the provision of open space and a play area, plus associated works for landscaping, parking areas, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular routes.
Additional Information:
1. Amendments are to be made to paragraph 9.3(1) (affordable housing recommendations of the Section 106 agreement) so that it is consistent with the wording in the draft legal agreement:
9.3 (A) Subject to the applicant first entering into an appropriate legal agreement in respect of the following:
1. To provide
at least 40 affordable housing units (Rent: 10 no. 1-bed, 9 no.
2-bed, 9 no. 3-bed, 2 no. 4-bed; Intermediate shared ownership: 1 no. 1-bed, 4 no. 2-bed, 4
no. 3-bed, 1 no. 4-bed) on-site built in accordance with current
Homes England development standards, the details of which shall be
agreed with the Council’s Planning Development Manager.
·
The split of the type of affordable housing shall be at least 30
for affordable rent and 10 dwellings for intermediate
shared ownership.
·
Prior to 6 months of
commencement of development the Registered Provider (RP) shall
enter into a Nominations Agreement in respect of the affordable
housing (in order that the social housing meets local needs).
·
Build and complete the affordable units and hand over to the
Registered Provider for occupation before more than 50% of the open
market units are occupied. sold
or substantially completed, whichever is the sooner.
2. Condition 26 (Demolition of bungalow) and reason to be deleted, as this will be controlled through the Section 106 agreement.
Public Speaking:
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, James Good spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:
1. The Bugle Nurseries site is set out in the new Spelthorne Local Plan
2. The Local Plan allocation removes a proportion of the site from the Green Belt for new residential development of 80 new homes with the remaining Green Belt land provided for public open space.
3. The officers recommend the application for approval.
4. The residential scheme is needed and would include 40 affordable homes.
5. The public open space would continue to be designated Green Belt and comprise of 6 acres of landscaped green space.
7. The greenspace will be better connected to Halliford Park by a new pedestrian crossing for easier access across Upper Halliford Road.
8. The existing commercial yards and bungalow in the northern part of the site would be removed and returned to greenspace as part of the new public open space.
Debate:
During the debate the following key issues were raised:
1. Concerns were raised about the proximity of the railway line
2. 50% affordable housing was required by the allocation subject to the Section 106 agreement.
3. The application would cement the position of the access road and the developable area.
4. Concerns were raised about impact on the existing volume of traffic on the Upper Halliford Bypass.
5. The amount of parking spaces in the proposal met the parking standards requirement.
6. A pedestrian crossing was part of the proposed application.
7. The sightlines on Upper Halliford Bypass would be preserved.
8. Ward councillors had not received any local objection to the application and were aware of support for the application.
9. The affordable units on site must be allocated from Spelthorne’s housing register as set out in the Draft Section 106 agreement.
Decision:
The Committee resolved to approve the application subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 agreement, and subject to removal of Condition 26.
|
12/26 |
Planning application 26/00017/FUL - 115 School Road, Ashford TW15 2AL
|
Description:
Change of use from a dwelling (Use Class C3) to a children’s care home (Use Class C2).
Additional Information:
1. The Council has received an email from the Chair of Spelthorne Committee for Access Now (SCAN) confirming that they wish to withdraw the objection originally submitted in respect of the application.
2. The applicant has submitted a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) statement, which summarises the various safety and security measures incorporated within the proposal. The statement also confirms that the applicant met with a police officer from Surrey Police’s Crime Reduction and Designing Out Crime team on 16 April 2026.
3. Having reviewed the CPTED and Secured by Design information provided, the Surrey Police Officer has confirmed that there will appropriate measures in place to reduce the risk and opportunity for crime. The proposal demonstrates clear engagement with Surrey Police Designing Out Crime, incorporates robust physical security, access control, surveillance, and management arrangements, and aligns with recognised Secured by Design standards.
4. Condition 3 to be amended:
The occupation of
the children’s young
adult's care home hereby permitted shall be limited to a
maximum of 4 residents at any time.
Reason:-. To safeguard the amenity of future residents of the property and neighbouring properties.
5. Condition 4 drawing number to be amended:
The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans (drawing No. 07 Revision A) for vehicles to be parked. Thereafter the parking area shall be retained and maintained for their designated purpose.
Reason: -. To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or the conditions of general safety along the neighbouring highways and to ensure that the facilities provided are reserved for the benefit of the development for which they are specifically required, in accordance with NPPF.
Public Speaking:
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Abena Akom spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:
1. The children’s home is regulated of Ofsted which ensures its suitability for a residential setting.
2. The home will have one staff car, and the property’s driveway accommodates up to three vehicles, minimising parking issues.
3. Staff will be on-site 24/7
4. The property offers ample recreational space
5. The site will have security including CCTV, good lighting, windows and fencing.
6. The Highway Authority has no objection to the planning application.
7. The site would undergo annual Ofsted inspections to ensure high standards of safety, quality accommodation and care.
A ward councillor, Councillor Sexton, was unable to attend the meeting but requested her call-in request be read by the Democratic Services Officer which raised the following key points:
1. This is an unsuitable location for children’s welfare
2. The location is inconsistent with providing a safe, calm and nurturing environment
3. Excessive noise on neighbours, air pollution from traffic affecting health, sleep, or wellbeing
4. Difficulty providing outdoor play or recreation space that is safe and accessible.
5. Insufficient or unsafe vehicular access for staff, visitors, emergency services, or school transport
6. Inadequate parking, leading to congestion on a busy road,
7. Highway safety and traffic impact
Debate:
During the debate the following key issues were raised:
1. The outdoor recreational space appeared insufficient
2. The property provides more than double the minimum requirement of garden space.
3. The security and operation of the site will be regulated by Ofsted.
4. Concern about parking and vehicles on-site
5. The home would not be different than any other six-person home.
6. Concern about the noise and disturbance which would be an intensification of current use.
Decision:
The Committee resolved to approve the application with changes to Conditions 3 and 4.
|
13/26 |
Planning Appeals Report
|
The Chair 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 Interim Planning Development Manager.
Resolved that the report of the Interim Planning Development Manager be received and noted.
|
14/26 |
Major Planning Applications
|
The Interim Planning Development Manager submitted a report outlining major applications that may be brought before the Planning Committee for determination.
Resolved that the report of the Planning Development Manager be received and noted.
Meeting adjourned: 20:46
Meeting reconvened: 20:52
|
15/26 |
Exclusion of Public and Press
|
It was proposed by Councillor Geraci, seconded by Councillor Rutherford and resolved to exclude the public and press for the discussion of the remaining item on the agenda in accordance with paragraph 3 of part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) because it was likely to disclose information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and in all circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information because the disclosure to the public would prejudice the financial position of the authority in being able to undertaken even handed negotiations and finalising acceptable contract terms.
|
16/26 |
Planning application 22/00591/FUL - Renshaw Estate, Mill Mead, Staines-upon-Thames TW18 4UQ
|
Description:
The Planning Committee considered a report from Officers containing advice from the Council’s consultants and legal advisors about matters arising from an update on a planning committee report.
Members considered matters arising from the report and debated them.
Decision:
The Committee resolved to approve the recommendation.
Given that this advice is legally privileged, the report arising from it and the discussions of members are necessarily confidential and cannot be published at this time.
Meeting ended 21:31