Agenda and minutes
PDF 200 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Knowle Green, Staines-upon-Thames TW18 1XB
Contact: Melis Owen Email: m.owen@spelthorne.gov.uk
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 26 April as a correct record. Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 26 April 2023 were approved as a correct record.
|
|
|
Disclosures of Interest To receive any disclosures of interest from councillors under the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, or contact with applicants/objectors under the Planning Code. Minutes: a) Disclosures of interest under the Members’ Code of Conduct
There were none.
b) Declarations of interest under the Council’s Planning Code
Councillors Bateson, Beatty, Buck, Geraci, Lee, Mathur, Nichols, and Rutherford reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application 23/00318/FUL but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views, and kept an open mind.
Councillor Bateson also reported that he had received representation from local residents in relation to application 23/00185/FUL and had made a visit to the site, but had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views, and kept an open mind.
Councillor Beecher and Howkins reported that they had received correspondence in relation to application 23/00318/FUL and had made an informal visit to the site. In relation to application 23/00185/FUL they had also made an informal visit to the site, but in both instances had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views, and kept an open mind.
Councillor Gibson reported that she had received correspondence in relation to application 23/00318/FUL. In relation to application 23/00185/FUL she had made an informal visit to the site, but in both instances had maintained an impartial role, had not expressed any views, and kept an open mind.
|
|
|
Planning application - 23/00318/FUL - 89 Marlborough Road, Ashford Ward
Ashford Town
Proposal
Erection of 12 walk-in style pens in rear garden of property and operation of cattery.
Recommendation
Approve the application subject to conditions.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Description: Erection of 12 walk-in style pens in rear garden of property and operation of Cattery.
Additional Information:
The Planning Officer reported the following:
Representations
One late representation sent to Councillors has been forwarded onto officers. Most of the issues raised are already covered in the Committee report. The additional issue is:
The A308 is close to the site and the noise generated by its proximity will cause stress to the cats and potentially cause them to be noisy. Environmental Health has been consulted on the proposal with regards to noise impact and has raised no objection.
Consultation A response has been received from the Environment Agency raising no objection subject to conditions and an informative already attached to the report.
Amended Plans
Plans have also been received showing all elevations and include minor changes to the elevations including clarification of window positions and changes to the rear elevation.
Condition 2 is therefore to be amended as follows:
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:
Location plan, ex elev 3,
Amended plans pro Elv 5, pro Elv5B, pro PL4, pro PL4B rec’d 24.05.2023.
Updates to report
New paragraph in section 7 of the report
Financial Considerations
Under S155 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, Local Planning Authorities are now required to ensure that potential financial benefits of certain development proposals are made public when a Local Planning Authority is considering whether or not to grant planning permission for planning applications which are being determined by the Council’s Planning Committee. A financial benefit must be recorded regardless of whether it is material to the Local Planning Authority’s decision on a planning application, but planning officers are required to indicate their opinion as to whether the benefit is material to the application or not. In consideration of S155 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016. The proposal is not CIL liable. It would be liable to pay business rates, but this is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this proposal. River Ash In several parts of the report, reference is made to the River Ash being located at the rear of the site. Whilst the River Ash is close to the site to the south, it is an open drain at the rear of the site which leads to the River Ash. Consequently, corrections are to be made to the executive summary (paragraph 1) and paragraphs 3.1, 3.3 and 7.1, plus the informative.
Public Speaking: In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Denise Maye spoke against the proposed development raising the following key points:
-Six letters of objection had already been submitted -The introduction of a cattery to a fully residential area was not appropriate -There was concern for additional traffic and parking -Cattery clients would have little regard for parking on a T-junction -Accidents would be heightened on the junction -Adjoining neighbours would be unable to ... view the full minutes text for item 28/23 |
|
|
Planning application - 23/00185/FUL - 10 Chestnut Grove Staines-Upon-Thames TW18 1BZ Ward
Staines South
Proposal
Demolition of converted garage and erection of new build part single storey, part two storey dwelling house with integral garage, including single storey rear extension to existing dwelling.
Recommendation
Approve the application subject to conditions as set out at Paragraph 8 of the Report.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Description: Demolition of converted garage and erection of new build part single storey, part two storey dwelling house with integral garage, including single storey rear extension to existing dwelling.
Additional Information:
The Senior Planning Officer reported the following:
The “Extension of Time Agreed until” should read 02.06.2023 rather than 28.03.2023. The applicant has submitted a ‘sunlight study’. This does impact the officer’s recommendation.
An overlay floor plan has also been received, showing the outline of the existing planning permission against the current proposals.
Public Speaking: In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Vernon Hillstrom spoke against the proposed development raising the following key points:
-Current tenants were not made aware of this new application by the owner -The new drawings show two kitchens which was not normal for a home dwelling -The owner seemed to plan on having one entrance but house multiple occupants in the property per room -Doubts were raised regarding legislation, regulation and fire risk assessment being adhered to -There was no more room for parking down Chestnut Grove -The current driveway for this property would be replaced with a garage -The layout and density of this new build would not fit the profile of other houses on this street -The proposal to bring the property towards the street would result in a loss of privacy for neighbours -This development would be overbearing for the residents on Churchill Court -The street cannot handle large trucks, lorries and tradesman for a long time which such a building would bring -Long term disruption to a residential street would be caused -This property would limit the sunlight neighbouring houses receive
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Matt Sung, spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:
-This was the revised application to the previous application which was granted on 29 June 2022 -The main changes compared to the previous application included a new internal parking space, a front elevation increase by 945mm and a rear extension increase by 1m -The new dwelling would form a semi-detached part of the existing dwelling detached house -the new dwelling would fully integrate into the existing first floor set back from the building line, with no overbearing -The footprint was sufficient for a two bedroom house -The guidelines set out by housing standards and local SPD on design and residential development were met -The revised proposal would have an internal garage instead of off street parking, with no change to street parking -A sunlight study carried out showed no impact on Churchill Court as the new areas are on the north side of it -The first floor window was set back from the building line so is no worse than the current situation -The first floor window was in recommended minimum distance for overlooking and privacy between windows across the road
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Councillor Bateson spoke as Ward Councillor against the proposed development raising the following key ... view the full minutes text for item 29/23 |
|
|
Planning Appeals Report To note details of the Planning appeals submitted and decisions received between 12 April and 15 May 2023. Minutes: 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 Planning Development Manager.
Resolved that the report of the Planning Development Manager be received and noted.
|
|
|
Major Planning Applications To note the details of future major planning applications. Minutes: The 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.
|