Members are asked to declare the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests in respect of any item of business to be considered at the meeting.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Kate Chinn, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Kate Chinn declared that all Councillors had received correspondence regarding Item 4 on the agenda but that she came to the meeting with a clear and open mind.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Neil Dallen, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Neil Dallen declared that he is a member of the Epsom & Town Ward Residents' Association and the Epsom Civic Society, but that he came to the meeting with a clear and open mind.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Nigel Collin, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Nigel Collin declared that he had received correspondence relating to items on the agenda but that he came to the meeting with a clear and open mind.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Nigel Collin, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Nigel Collin declared that he is the Borough Heritage Champion.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Steven McCormick, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Steven McCormick declared that all Councillors had received correspondence on Item 3 (101-117 East Street) and Item 4 (Land Rear of 23A to 33 Links Road), but that they came to the meeting with a clear and open mind.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Steven McCormick, Other Interest: In the interests of openness and transparency, Councillor Steven McCormick declared that he is a member of the Epsom & Town Ward Residents' Association, the Epsom Civic Society, the Epsom & Ewell Tree Advisory Board, Epsom Rotary and the Surrey Tree Wardens Network.

The Committee is asked to confirm as a true record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 17 February 2022 (attached) and authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The Minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee held on 17 February 2022 were agreed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

Demolition of the existing buildings and erection of part 3 storey, part 4 storey building comprising 21 residential flats with associated car and cycle parking and refuse storage.

Description

Demolition of the existing buildings and erection of part 3 storey, part 4 storey building comprising 21 residential flats with associated car and cycle parking and refuse storage

Decision

Following consideration, it was resolved (7 in favour, 3 against, 0 abstaining and the Chair not voting) that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.         The proposed rear access road, by reason of its layout and the proposed vehicular access arrangements, would give rise to highway and pedestrian safety issues, in conflict with Policy CS16 (Managing Transport and Travel) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments (including House Extensions)) of the LDF Development Management Policies Document (2015) and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

2.         The proposal would fail to provide an appropriate level of on-site car parking resulting in harm on the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers' in terms of streetscene and availability of on-street car parking. The proposed 16 on-site car parking spaces would not meet the minimum parking standards set out in Table 1 of the Council's Parking Standards for Residential Development SPD (2015), in conflict with Policy CS16 (Managing Transport and Travel) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policy DM37 (Parking Standards) of the LDF Development Management Policies Document (2015), and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

3.         The proposal, by reason of its bulk, mass and density, would adversely impact and harm the character and appearance and visual amenities of the surrounding area, in conflict with Policy CS5 (The Built Environment) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policies DM9 (Townscape Character and Local Distinctiveness), DM10 and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments (including House Extensions)) and Policy DM11 (Housing Density) of the LDF Development Management Policies Document (2015) and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

4.         In the absence of a completed legal obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), to secure an affordable housing contribution, the applicant has failed to comply with Policy CS9 (Affordable Housing and meeting Housing Needs) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007).

Erection of three dwellings with associated access, parking, landscaping and other minor ancillary development.

Description

Erection of three dwellings with associated access, parking, landscaping and other minor ancillary development

Decision

The Committee received a presentation from the Planning Officer.

Following consideration, the Committee resolved (7 in favour of approval, 2 in favour of refusal, 1 abstention and the Chair not voting) to APPROVE the application subject to the following conditions:

CONDITION(S):

(1)       The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51(1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(2)       The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

405(PL)00 Location Plan

405(PL)02 Proposed Ground Floor Site Plan

405(PL)03 Proposed First Floor Site Plan

405(PL)04 Proposed Roof Level Site Plan 

405(PL)05 Proposed Ground Floor GA Plans

405(PL)06 Proposed First Floor GA Plans

405(PL)07 Proposed Elevations – Unit 1

405(PL)08 Proposed Elevations – Unit 2

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Phase 1 Habitat Assessment

Ecological Statement

Arboricultural Implications Report and Method Statement

Energy and Sustainability Statement

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

(3)       Prior to above ground works, details and samples of all external materials (including boundary treatment) to be used for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To secure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development in accordance with Policy CS5 (The Built Environment) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policies DM9 (Townscape Character and Local Distinctiveness) and DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments (including House Extensions)) of the LDF Development Management Policies Document (2015).

(4)       Prior to beneficial occupation, details of the design and external appearance of the boundary treatment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter by constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to safeguard the visual amenities of the area and to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy CS5 (The Built Environment) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments (including House Extensions)) of the LDF Development Management Policies (2015).

(5)       Prior to above ground works, details of existing and proposed finished site levels, finished floor and ridge levels of the proposed dwelling to be erected, and finished external surface levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to safeguard the visual amenities of the area/ in order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy CS5 (The Built Environment) of the LDF Core Strategy (2007) and Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments (including House Extensions)) of the LDF Development Management Policies (2015).  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of 20 flats within two blocks with associated car parking and landscaping.

Description

Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of 20 flats within two blocks with associated car parking and landscaping

Decision

The Committee noted a presentation from the Principal Planning Officer.

The application had been appealed on the basis of non-determination.  Members would be considering whether they would have refused the proposal or if they would have approved the proposal.

Following consideration, the Committee resolved with 10 members voting in favour of refusal, none against and no abstentions, and the Chair not voting, that the application would have been REFUSED on the following grounds:

(1)          As a result of its overall scale and design, the proposed development would represent an overdevelopment of the site and cause significant visual harm to the character and appearance of the area.

(2)          The proposed development would not meet the minimum space standards for residential accommodation and would not provide adequate outdoor private amenity space failing to deliver a high standard of amenity and resulting in inadequate living conditions to the detriment of future occupiers.

(3)           The proposed development would cause significant harm to the private amenities of the occupiers of surrounding properties by way of off loss of light, loss of outlook and loss of privacy.

(4)          The Council currently does not have a 5 year housing land supply. This means that the “presumption in favour of sustainable development” (paragraph 11 of the NPPF) (Also known colloquially as the ‘tilted balance’) is engaged, and that planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the NPPF 2021 as a whole. Overall, the adverse effects of the proposal would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole.