Agenda item

Ward

 

Staines

 

Proposal

 

Redevelopment of the site to provide 64 new residential units (Use Class C3) with flexible commercial business and service floor space (Use Class E) and drinking establishment (Sui Generis) at ground floor, rooftop amenity space, associated highways works and other ancillary and enabling works.

 

Recommendation

 

The recommendation is to approve the application subject to a legal agreement and the conditions as set out in Paragraph 8 of the Report.

Description:

 

Redevelopment of the site to provide 64 new residential units (Use Class C3) with flexible commercial business and service floor space (Use Class E) and drinking establishment (Sui Generis) at ground floor, rooftop amenity space, associated highways works and other ancillary and enabling works.

 

Additional Information:

 

The final two paragraphs of the executive summary to be amended as follows:

 

With the exception of 1 disabled parking bay in the link road, and 3 disabled bays in the Phase 1A basement car park, the applicant initially proposed for the development to be ‘car free’. During the application process, the applicant undertook an occupancy survey of the basement parking spaces in Phase 1A. Consequent to this survey, the applicant offered 20 of the parking spaces in the Phase 1A basement car park to the occupiers of Phase 1C, giving a total of 21 spaces, including the space on the link road.

 

Officers initially understood that such spaces could not be secured through the planning process. However, further legal advice has been sought indicating that this is possible. This would give a parking ratio at Phase 1C of 0.33 spaces per dwelling, and 0.67 spaces across Phase 1A and 1C developments combined. This alongside the sustainable location of the site, a £100,000 contribution to improved pedestrian facilities between the site and Staines Railway Station and Staines High Street and free membership to the car club for the first occupiers of each unit, is considered to be acceptable mitigation for the shortfall against the Council’s minimum Parking Standards.

 

Paragraph 3.2 should  refer to Grade I, Grade II and Grade III* Listed Buildings rather than Grade I*.

 

Paragraph 7.111 amended to:

 

The applicant initially stated that with the exception of 3 disabled parking bays in Phase 1A and 1 disabled parking bay proposed in the link road, the development would not provide any off-street parking spaces for the proposed occupiers of Phase 1C. Therefore, with the exception of the disabled parking bays, the development would have been ‘car free’.

 

As noted in paragraph 7.109, the  applicant has submitted a Technical Notice, which includes an occupancy survey of the parking bays in Phase 1A. The applicant has also confirmed that 255 of the 260 units in Phase 1A have been sold. In a further email the applicant has also confirmed that they understand that 93% of the units in Phase 1A have been occupied.

 

The applicant conducted a day parking survey (2pm on 11 May 2021), which found that 93 of the basement parking spaces in Phases 1A were in occupation and 124 were unoccupied. A night time survey was also conducted (1am on 13 May 2021) and found that there were 124 spaces occupied and 95 spaces free.

 

When factoring in the 5 unsold units, 95 of the 217 spaces in Phase 1A would haver been expected to have been in use at the point of the daytime survey and 125 spaces would have been expected to have been occupied at the time of the night time survey.

 

Following the undertaking of the occupancy survey, the applicant has confirmed that they are able to release 20 spaces in the basement car park of Phase 1A to the occupiers of Phase 1C. This would give a 0.33 off street parking ratio for the 64 units at Phase 1C and combines 0.67 parking space ratio across Phase 1A and 1B.

 

Officers initially understood that the spaces in the Phase 1A basement could not be secured through planning objections. However, following further legal advice, it is now understood that such spaces can now be secured through the planning process. It is understood that Census data from 2011 suggests that 35% of flats in the vicinity of the development do not have any vehicles associated with them, although this data is now 10 years old. As there would be a parking ratio of 0.67 spaces across the 64 units in Phase 1C and 260 units in Phase 1A (0.33 at Phase 1C alone), the securing of 20 spaces in Phase 1A and 1 further space in the link road, is considered to be an acceptable mitigation measure justifying a shortfall against the Council’s Parking Standards minimum requirements, alongside the £100,000 contribution pedestrian facility improvements to Staines Railway Station and Staines High Street, and the provision of 5 years of free car club membership to the first occupiers of each unit.

 

Paragraph 7.116 amended to:

 

The CHA considered that owing to the absence of parking and lack of vehicle ownership amongst residents it is likely that the vehicular trip generation would be relatively low. The applicant has since offered 20 parking spaces in Phase 1C. As the occupants of the Phase 1A parking spaces would be utilising existing parking spaces, Officers do not consider that additional trip generation would cause significant harm.

 

Paragraph 7.119 final two sentences amended to:

 

Given this and the Council’s own Parking Standards SPG, which allows for a reduction in parking standards in the town centre and given the particular circumstances of this stie referred to above, it is considered that the shortfall in parking proposed in this particular case is acceptable. It is also relevant to note that the reduction in cars on site will be of benefit to the environment by minimising carbon emissions and the impact of air quality in the area.

 

Paragraph 7.120 final sentence amended to:

 

Clearly this does not apply in this particular case and it is considered that the shortfall in parking in this sustainable location is acceptable.

 

Paragraph 8A, an additional point 5 added:

 

5. To secure 20 car parking spaces of the ground floor basement of Phase 1A.

 

An additional condition and reason to be added to the Recommendation section:

 

Notwithstanding any demolition or site preparation works, the development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a disabled parking bay has been provided in the link road. These elements shall be provided in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason:- To ensure that the disabled parking space on the link road is secured and thereafter maintained.

 

Paragraphs 7.2, 7.11, 7.13, 7.20, 7.34, 7.37, 7.52, 7.120 and 7.157 refer to specific paragraphs of the NPPF 2019. The NPPF 2021 retains this guidance, (different paragraph numbering) but with a greater emphasis on the provision of good design in development. 

 

 

Public Speaking:

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

 

-       Lack of open spaces and play area

-       The 6 affordable flats has their own entrance with no lift

 

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

 

-       Phase 1C will provide 64 affordable homes

-       100% of the homes will be affordable

-       All dwellings meet or exceed the required space standards

-       All dwellings have private external amenity and access to a communal roof garden

-       Development is a short walk from Staines train station, local amenities and shops

-       The scheme is underpinned by sustainable and energy efficient design principles

-       This stage is lower in height compared to the previous two phases

-       The parking ratio will be 0.67.

-       Purchasers will receive 5 years of free car club membership and cycle parking

-       Charging points within the cycle stores will be provided to allow charging of e-bikes and e-scooters

-       A financial contribution of £1000,000 will be made towards pedestrian facility improvements between the site and Staines Railway Station and the High Street

-        

 

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

 

-       This development would provide much needed housing

-       Blocks 1a and 1b will suffer from lack of sunlight/daylight if Block 1c is built

-       Concerns over poaching of car parking spaces from other blocks to provide parking for this phase

-       The building is too large

-       Family friendly piazza will be surrounded by flat

-       Negative impact on air quality during construction

-       The Planning Committee have already approved two similar blocks on this site

-       The affordable units are segregated from the rest of the block and are not able to use the lift so would cause accessibility issues for some potential disabled/elderly residents

-       The development is made up of 100% affordable units

 

 

A recorded vote was requested by Councillor J Vinson. The voting was as follows:

 

For(4)	A Brar, H Harvey,T Lagden, R Smith-Ainsley
Against (6)	C Bateson, J Doran, M Gibson, R Sider BEM, B Spoor, J Vinson
Abstain (1)	R Noble

 

The motion to approve the application fell.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Gibson and seconded by Councillor Sider BEM that the application be refused as it was in contravention of Policies EN1b and CC3 of the Spelthorne Borough Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document 2009.

 

A recorded vote was requested by Councillor J Vinson. The voting was as follows:

 

For (7)	C Bateson, J Doran, M Gibson, R Noble, R Sider BEM, B Spoor, J Vinson
Against (3)	A Brar, T Lagden, R Smith-Ainsley
Abstain (0)

 

Decision: The application was REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

The proposal is considered to have an unacceptable overbearing impact on neighbouring residential properties causing a harmful loss of light, contrary to Policy EN1b of the Spelthorne Borough Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document 2009.

 

The proposal is considered likely to result in unacceptable parking stress on residential roads in the locality, which would be detrimental to the amenity of residential properties, contrary to Policy CC3 of the Spelthorne Borough Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document 2009 and the Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Guidance 2011.

 

 

Councillor H Harvey left the meeting at 9.30pm

 

Councillor R Sider left the meeting at 9.45pm