Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 2020 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 2020 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

Councillor R.W. Sider BEM declared a conflict of interest in relation to application 19/01710/RVC because he knew the objectors and lives in Walton Lane and as such decided that he may be perceived as being biased in determining this planning application. He would leave the meeting for consideration of this item.

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

The Chairman, Councillor R.A. Smith-Ainsley declared on behalf of all Committee members that applications 19/01699/HOU and 19/01496/FUL were made by a member of Council staff and the Council itself, respectively.

Councillors R.A. Smith-Ainsley and V. Siva reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application 18/01143/FUL but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views and had kept an open mind.

Ward

Ashford North and Stanwell South

Proposal

Redevelopment of surplus hospital car park to provide 115 residential units, comprising 110 flats and 5 terraced houses with associated access, parking services, facilities and amenity space.

Officer recommendation

To approve subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 agreement.

This application was withdrawn by the applicant before the meeting.

Ward

Laleham and Shepperton Green

Proposal

Change of use to provide a water sports leisure facility, car parking and other associated facilities.

Officer recommendation

To approve subject to a temporary permission and conditions set out at paragraph 8 of the report.

Description:

Change of use to provide a water sports leisure facility with associated inflatables and floating jetty, toilets, changing rooms, first aid building, car parking and other associated facilities.

Additional Information:

The Planning Development Manager advised the Committee of the following:

An amended site location plan showing a reduced application site area had been circulated to all committee members.

A late letter of objection was received from Spelthorne Natural History Society raising a number of issues, many of which are covered in the planning committee report.  The additional issue relates to green belt concerns.

Additional condition

A floating safety barrier marking the extent of the application site on the lake shall be maintained at all times between 1st April and 31st August annually and between 1st September and 31st March this barrier shall be removed from the lake.

Reason:-.To accord with the terms of the planning application and to safeguard the Ecology and Biodiversity of the Site of Nature Conservation Importance and its environs as required by Policy SP6 of the Spelthorne Core Strategy and Policies DPD (2009).

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Emma Pattinson spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

• Will be a benefit to the natural environment
• Will help to improve leisure activity and to increase health and fitness
• The use supports many schools
• Improvements to the River Ash have already taken place
• Less than 10% of the lake’s bank will be used
• Bridges have been added to prevent damage to the bank

Debate:

During the debate the following key points were made:

• Queries over water supply, foul waste disposal
• Queries over possible use of the site for motorised sports
• Concerns over safety of the children in water
• Impact on the green belt
• Concern over ecological impact
• Traffic and pollution
• An informative asking the applicant to give consideration to providing a disabled W.C. on site.
• Concerns over contamination of water in lake
• Activity will act as guardian for wildlife on site

Decision:

The application was approved subject to conditions as per the officer report and the following additional condition and informative:

Additional condition

A floating safety barrier marking the extent of the application site on the lake shall be maintained at all times between 1st April and 31st August annually and between 1st September and 31st March this barrier shall be removed from the lake.

Reason:-.To accord with the terms of the planning application and to safeguard the Ecology and Biodiversity of the Site of Nature Conservation Importance and its environs as required by Policy SP6 of the Spelthorne Core Strategy and Policies DPD (2009).

Additional informative

The applicant is advised to consider the provision of disabled toilet facilities within the site.

NB: Such provision would require planning permission.

Ward

Shepperton Town

Proposal

Relaxation of condition 3 of Planning Permission 19/00478/HOU and listed building consent, reference 19/01709/LBC to raise the front boundary wall by 0.8m

Officer recommendation

To approve planning permission and listed building consent.

Councillor R.W. Sider BEM left the meeting room for the consideration of this item.

Description:

Relaxation of Condition 3 of Planning Permission 19/00478/HOU And Listed Building Consent 19/01709/LBC to raise the front boundary wall by 0.8m.

Additional Information:

The Planning Development Manager advised the Committee of some amendments to Paragraph 3.2, page 89 of the Report:

·         The approved orangery would have protruded approximately 1.5 metres higher than the boundary wall instead of 1.4 metres.

·         The approved height of the orangery is 3.6 metres instead of 3.5 metres.

·         The height of the boundary wall will be increased by 0.9 metres instead of 0.8 metres. The description of the proposal should be amended to reflect this.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Paul Harper spoke against the proposed development raising the following key points:

·         Loss of decorative cornice which was included in the approved scheme.

·         Amendments seek to save costs

·         Causes harm to heritage asset

·         There is no need for the changes to take place

·         Out of keeping with the locality

·         Contrary to NPPF

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Daryll Westen spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

·         Only part of the wall will be increased in height

·         A “swan neck” feature is proposed to soften the impact where the change in the height of the wall occurs

·         Integrity of structure is maintained

·         Happy to agree to a condition to keep historic texture of the vertical header

·         There has been extensive dialogue with council planning officers

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

·         Concern over the proposed increase in the height of the wall

·         Adverse impact on the view of the listed building

·         A condition should be imposed requiring the existing vertical header detailing of the wall capping to be retained and incorporated into the raising of the boundary wall.

·         Complies with NPPF

Decision:

Both applications, 19/01710/RVC and 19/01709/LBC were approved subject to conditions as per the officer report and the following additional condition:

“The existing vertical header detailing of the wall capping shall be retained and incorporated into the raising of the boundary wall hereby approved.

Reason: In the interest of the character and appearance of the listed historic boundary wall in accordance with policies SP6, EN1, EN5 and EN6 of the Spelthorne Borough Core Strategy and Policies Development plan Document 2009 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.”

Ward

Ashford Town

Proposal

Erection of a single storey side and rear extension.

Officer recommendation

To approve the application subject to conditions as set out at paragraph 8 of the report.

Councillor N. Gething left the meeting before this item was considered.

Description:

Erection of a single storey side and rear extension.

Additional Information:

The Planning Development Manager advised the Committee of an amendment to the ward (page 103 of the agenda) which was Sunbury Common and not Ashford Town.

Public Speaking:

There was none.

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

·         The scheme has been reduced to avoid an adverse impact on the neighbouring property.

Decision:

The application was approved subject to conditions as per the officer report.

Ward

Staines

Proposal

Installation of a steel jetty with hardwood decking to provide a passenger boat landing stage together with the installation of piles.

Officer recommendation

To approve subject to conditions set out at paragraph 8 of the report.

Description:

Installation of a steel jetty with hardwood decking to provide a passenger boat landing stage together with the installation of piles.

Additional Information:

There was none.

Public Speaking:

There was none.

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

·         Will be a good facility for the borough

·         Will open up the use of the River Thames

·         Concern over the design

·         The design is constrained by the finance available

·         Hydro power should be incorporated into the scheme

Decision:

The application was approved subject to conditions as per the officer report.

To consider any items which the Chairman considers as urgent.

There were none.