Agenda and draft minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 29 April 2026 as a correct record.

The minutes of the meeting held on 29 April 2026 were approved as a correct record.

To receive any disclosures of interest from councillors under the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were none.

To receive any declarations of interest from councillors under the Planning Code including contact with applicants/objectors.

In relation to application 26/00234/FUL Councillors Betty, Buck, Burrell, reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views and had kept an open mind.

Councillors Rutherford and Gibson reported that they had visited both sites.

Ward

Laleham and Shepperton Green

Proposal

Erection of a 4m high acoustic fence, with associated landscaping and lighting and amendments to the Unit Base Management Plan at Car Park 11

Recommendation

Approve the application subject to conditions, as set out at Section 8 of the report.

Description:

Erection of a 4m high acoustic fence, with associated landscaping and lighting and amendment to the Unit Base Management Plan at Car Park 11

Additional Information:

An email had been received from the applicant raising the following comments:

1.    Clarification that Car Park 11 already benefits from planning permission for 24-hour parking and unit base use under the existing permissions. The proposal does not change the use of the site or increase the area used as unit base but instead relates to flexibility in the arrival and departure times of trailers associated with productions based at Shepperton.

2.    The use of Car Park 11 as a unit base is relatively infrequent, with the last use taking place in December 2025.

3.    In response to neighbour concerns, the proposed acoustic fence height is reduced to 3.5 metres behind the rear gardens of 29 and 31 Cranwell Grove.

4.    With regard to lighting, no increase in lighting levels is proposed. Lighting attached to the fence would replace existing bollard lighting and that temporary lighting arrangements would continue to operate in accordance with the approved management plan.

5.    Finally, the applicant has confirmed agreement with the recommended planning conditions, subject to a minor amendment to the landscaping condition to allow planting to take place during the next available planting season following installation of the fence.

Condition 5 to be amended as follows:

The extended operational ours including Sunday/Bank Holiday hereby permitted shall not be implemented until the 4m high acoustic fence and additional planting has been fully implemented in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The additional approved planting shall be fully implemented within the next planting season.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Andrew Smith of Shepperton Studios spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

1.    The proposals reflect resident feedback

2.    Additional evergreen tree planting to be put in place to mitigate any disturbance to surrounding properties

3.    The fence height to the rear of two properties has been reduced

4.    Change to arrival and departure times to allow productions to move between locations and the studio without disruption to shooting schedules

5.    Car Park 11 already has planning approval to operate as a car park for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week so there will not be any intensification in usage

6.    A landscaped bund will be erected between the proposed fence and the studio boundary which will be enhanced with evergreen tree planting.

7.    The application would ensure that Shepperton Studios remains globally competitive.

8.    Impact on residents has been mitigated

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Councillor Clarke spoke as Ward Councillor against the proposed development raising the following key points:

1.    Councillor Clarke called in the application for transparency purposes

2.    The natural vegetarian surrounding the site has grown considerably

3.    Further planting is planned as part of the application

4.    This application is only to amend the timings

5.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20/26

Ward

Laleham and Shepperton Green

Proposal

Change of use from Public House (Sui Generis) to a single residential dwelling (Class C3) including demolition of rear structures and internal and external associated works

Recommendation

Approve the application subject to conditions, as set out at Section 8 of the report.

Description: Change of use from Public House (Sui Generis) to a single residential dwelling (Class C3) including demolition of rear structures and internal and external associated works

Additional Information:

There was none.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, David Lane, the agent for the applicant spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

1.    The application complies with planning policy and the adopted Local Plan

2.    The proposed dwelling has sympathetically been designed with no alterations to the external front of the building

3.    The poor quality extensions to the rear of the property would be demolished, therefore reducing the overall footprint

4.    This has not been used as a public house for over two year and there are two other public houses within walking distance

5.    Change of use would result in a reduction in the noise level

6.    The Highways Agency were happy with proposed parking provision

7.    No objections had been received from the statutory consultees

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

1.   The plans are sympathetic to the aesthetics of the building

2.   Use of the building as a single dwelling would be positive

 3.  Residents are concerned that once renovated, the dwelling would become a House of Multiple Occupation

4. Heritage Officer had not objected to any of the rear extensions being demolished

5. Should the building be considered as an asset of community value

6. There had been 6 owners in the past 15 years and none could afford to upgrade the property and their businesses had to close.

7. The lack of parking within the curtilage of the property had been a negative when going out to market

8. Separate planning permission would be need if the current owner or any subsequent owner wanted to convert the dwelling into a House of Multiple Occupation

9. The parking area at the front of the property is owned by Surrey County Council.

10. Evidence provided from a viability assessment provided assurance that the property would no longer be viable as a commercial property/public house

11. The new owners of the dwelling would use the public parking at the front of the property

Decision:

The application was approved as per the agenda

To note details of the Planning appeals submitted and decisions received between 16 April 2026 and 14 May 2026).

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 Interim Planning Development Manager.

Resolved that the report of the Interim Planning Development Manager be received and noted.

The meeting ended 20.40