Agenda and minutes

In light of the apologies provided by the Chair, Councillor Humphrey Reynolds, and in his absence from the meeting, the Vice-Chair, Councillor Steven McCormick, announced to the Committee that he would preside as the Acting Chair of the meeting.

In the absence of a Vice-Chair, the Committee unanimously elected to appoint Councillor Phil Neale as Acting Vice-Chair for the meeting.

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.

No Disclosable Pecuniary Interests were declared by Members with respect to any item of business to be considered at the meeting.

The Committee is asked to confirm as a true record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on the 9 November 2023 (attached) and to authorise the Chair to sign them.

The Committee confirmed as a true record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on the 9 November 2023 and authorised the Chair to sign them.

Construction of a three to five-storey building plus basement for use as a care home (Use Class C2) with up to 81 bedrooms and associated communal spaces and services, together with associated car and cycle parking, refuse storage and ancillary works.

The Committee received a presentation on the application from the Principal Planning Officer.

Description:

Construction of a three to five-storey building plus basement for use as a care home (Use Class C2) with up to 81 bedrooms and associated communal spaces and services, together with associated car and cycle parking, refuse storage and ancillary works.

Officer Recommendation:

Approval, subject to conditions, informatives, and s106 legal agreement.

Decision:

Following consideration, Councillor Phil Neale proposed that an informative be added to address the timings of staff shift swap-overs and any actions the applicant could take in order to mitigate the impact on the local area in terms of the traffic generated by the staff coming to and leaving the site.

The proposal did not receive a seconder and consequently the motion was lost.

Following further consideration, the Acting Chair put the Officer recommendation to the vote. The Committee resolved (5 in Favour, 3 Against, and the Acting Chair not voting):

PART A

To grant planning permission subject to a Section 106 Agreement securing the following Heads of Terms:

·                     Bus Stop Infrastructure at both the A24 northside bus stop and A24 southside bus stop, to include shelters and real time passenger information

·                     Push button controlled pedestrian crossing facilities on London Road

·                     A 3m wide footway on both the London Road and Ewell Bypass frontages to the Site

·                     Travel Plan Auditing fee of £6,150

and the following conditions and informatives.

PART B

In the event that the Section 106 Agreement referred to in Part A is not completed by 14 June 2024, the Head of Place Development is authorised to refuse the application for the following reason:

“In the absence of a completed legal obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the applicant has failed to comply with Policy SC9 and CS16 of the Core Strategy 2007 and Policies DM36 and DM37 of the Development Management Policies Document 2015.”

Conditions:

(1)          Timescale

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission

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

(2)          Approved details

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 420(SP)01 - Location Plan

420(SP)03 Rev P00 - Proposed Site Plan

420(SP)04 Rev P00 - Proposed Ground Floor Site Plan

GA 420(GA)01 Rev P00 - Proposed Basement Floor GA

420(GA)02 Rev P00 - Proposed Ground Floor GA

420(GA)03 Rev P00 - Proposed First Floor GA

420(GA)04 Rev P00 - Proposed Second Floor GA

420(GA)05 Rev P00 - Proposed Third Floor GA

420(GA)06 Rev P01 - Proposed Fourth Floor GA

420(GA)07 Rev P00 - Proposed Roof Plan GA

420(GA)20 Rev P00 - Proposed Elevations GA - Proposed Streetscapes

420(GA)21 Rev P00 - Proposed Elevations GA – Southwest

420(GA)22 Rev P00 - Proposed Elevations GA – Southeast

420(GA)23 Rev P00 - Proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of 14 new dwellings within two blocks with associated car parking and landscaping.

The Committee received a presentation on the application from the Principal Planning Officer.

Description:

Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of 14 new dwellings within two blocks with associated car parking and landscaping.

Officer Recommendation:

Approval, subject to conditions, informatives, and s106 legal agreement.

Public Speaking:

An objector spoke against the application.

Decision:

Following consideration, the Acting Chair proposed that Condition 3 be amended to include the following:

j)             methods to facilitate open communication with Epsom and Ewell High School

For the following reason:

To enable a communication channel between the school and the construction site to allow both parties to keep abreast of any requirements with respect to matters such as delivery times, etc, and to keep the school up to date on building progress.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Kate Chinn.

The Committee unanimously agreed to the proposal.

Following further consideration, the Acting Chair put the Officer recommendation to the vote. The Committee resolved (4 in Favour, 4 Against, and the Acting Chair exercising his right to a casting vote to vote in Favour):

PART A

To grant planning permission subject to the S106 Legal Agreement to secure a viability review mechanism in the event that the development has not reached first floor slab level on both buildings within 20 months of the decision date.

PART B

In the event that the Section 106 Agreement referred to in Part A is not completed by 18 March 2024, the Head of Place Development is authorised to refuse the application for the following reason:

“In the absence of a completed legal obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended, the applicant has failed to comply with Policy CS9 of the Core Strategy 2007.”

Conditions:

(1)          Time Limit

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)          Approved Details

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

Site Location Plan at 1:1250

Drawing Number PL10-002

Drawing Number PL10-003fa

Drawing Number PL10-004a

Drawing Number PL13-001e

Drawing Number PL13-001f

Drawing Number PL13-002g

Drawing Number PL13-003d

Drawing Number PL13-004g

Drawing Number PL13-100g

Drawing Number PL13-101d

Drawing Number PL13-103b

Drawing Number PL13-104c

Drawing Number PL13-120c

Drawing Number PL13-101d

Drawing Number PL30-001e

Drawing Number PL31-001o

Drawing Number PL101z

Drawing Number PL102g

Drawing Number PL40n

Drawing Number PL103g

Drawing Number PL28-001d

Drawing Number DPA-5046-04h

Drawing Number 201249/TR/41 Rev E

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning as required by Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy 2007.

Pre-Commencement Conditions

(3)          Construction Transport Management Plan

No development shall commence unless and until a Construction Transport Management Plan, to include details of:

1)            parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors

k)         loading and unloading of plant and materials

l)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Demolition of 79-81 East Street and the construction of a part 5, part 6 storey building containing 31 residential units (10 x 1-bed, 17 x 2-bed and 4 x 3-bed) (Class C3) together with car parking, landscaping and access arrangements and associated works.

The Committee received a presentation on the application from the Principal Planning Officer.

Description:

Demolition of 79-81 East Street and the construction of a part 5, part 6 storey building containing 31 residential units (10 x 1-bed, 17 x 2-bed and 4 x 3-bed) (Class C3) together with car parking, landscaping and access arrangements and associated works.

Officer Recommendation:

Approval, subject to conditions, informatives, and s106 legal agreement.

Public Speaking:

The Agent spoke in support of the application.

Decision:

Following consideration, Councillor Neil Dallen proposed that the application be refused for the following reasons:

Reason: The proposed development would represent an overdevelopment that would fail to respect the pattern of development in the locality and would appear as an overly dominating and incongruous addition that would fail to respect the surrounding built form and the proposal would therefore fail to integrate with the prevailing character an appearance of the area, contrary to Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, CS5 of the Core Strategy, and  policies DM9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

Reason: It has not been robustly demonstrated that the shortfall in vehicle parking provision associated with the proposed development would not have a harmful impact on the surrounding area in terms of street scene or the availability of on street parking. The proposed development cannot be considered as an exception to the policy and therefore fails to comply with section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework, and Policies DM10 and 37 of the Development Management Plan.

Reason: The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the setting of the conservation area for which the public benefits do not outweigh the harm and is contrary to section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy and policies DM 8, 9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Jan Mason.

The Committee voted (2 For, 6 Against, and the Acting Chair not voting) against the proposal, and the motion was lost.

Following further consideration, the Acting Chair put the Officer recommendation to the vote. Subsequently, the Committee resolved (6 For, 2 Against, and the Acting Chair not voting):

PART A

To grant planning permission subject to the S106 Legal Agreement with the following Heads of Terms:

a)            The provision of 16 affordable rented units with rent limited to 70% of the open market rent (including service charge) in a mix of 5 no. one bed, 9 no. two bed and 2 no. three bed units

b)           A clause to prevent occupation or use of the development by a person or person(s) in possession of an Epsom and Ewell Residents Parking Zone Permit

c)            S278 Agreement for car-club and management; within six months of the occupation of the first dwelling the provision of a car club vehicle for a minimum of five years, with all costs associated with the provision of the vehicle including provision of parking space on the public highway and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Fourth floor roof extension to 83-85 East Street to provide three new residential apartments (comprising 1 x 1-bed unit; 1 x 2-bed unit; 1 x 3-bed unit) together with works to stair and lift cores and other associated works.

The Committee received a presentation on the application from the Principal Planning Officer.

Description:

Fourth floor roof extension to 83-85 East Street to provide three new residential apartments (comprising 1 x 1-bed unit; 1 x 2-bed unit; 1 x 3-bed unit) together with works to stair and lift cores and other associated works.

Officer Recommendation:

Approval, subject to conditions, informatives, and s106 legal agreement.

Public Speaking:

The Agent spoke in support of the application.

Decision:

Following consideration, Councillor Clive Woodbridge proposed that condition 11 be amended to prevent any construction works from taking place on Saturdays, in order to further safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and to prevent any nuisance from being caused to said occupiers as a result of construction works taking place on what is traditionally a non-working day.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Neil Dallen.

The Committee voted (5 For, 2 Against, 1 Abstaining, and the Acting Chair not voting) in favour of the proposal.

Following further consideration, Councillor Neil Dallen proposed that the application be refused for the following reasons:

Reason: The proposed development would represent an overdevelopment that would fail to respect the pattern of development in the locality and would appear as an overly dominating and incongruous addition that would fail to respect the surrounding built form and the proposal would therefore fail to integrate with the prevailing character an appearance of the area, contrary to Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, CS5 of the Core Strategy, and policies DM9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

Reason: The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the setting of the conservation area for which the public benefits do not outweigh the harm and is contrary to section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy and policies DM 8, 9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Peter O’Donovan.

The Committee voted (3 For, 4 Against, 1 Abstaining, and the Acting Chair not voting) against the proposal, and the motion was lost.

The Acting Chair subsequently put the Officer recommendation, as amended with the agreed change to Condition 11, to the vote. The Committee voted (3 For, 5 Against, and the Acting Chair not voting) against the recommendation, and the motion was lost.

Following further consideration, Councillor Peter O’Donovan proposed that the Officer recommendation to approve the application, as amended with the agreed change to Condition 11, be revisited, explaining that, since the previous vote, he had listened to debate and to the guidance of Officers and was now minded to vote differently.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Kate Chinn.

The Committee voted (4 in favour, 4 against, and the Acting Chair exercising his right to a casting vote to vote in favour) in favour of the proposal.

Subsequently, the Committee resolved (4 in favour, 4 against, and the Acting Chair exercising his right to a casting vote to vote in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.