At the Meeting on 13 April 2005 the Committee Resolved to Defer Making a Decision on The

AGENDA 5 ITEM: TO: PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 11 May 2005 REPORT OF: HEAD OF BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AUTHOR: Guy Davies

APPLICATION NO: 04/02411/F WARD: RE RECEIVED: 07/10/04 APPLICANT: Linden New Homes Ltd AGENT: David Lock Associates Ltd LOCATION: LAND AT HOLMETHORPE QUARRY (MERE PARK), REDHILL DESCRIPTION: 498 dwellings, light industrial units, local shop, veterinary surgery, nursing care home, children’s day nursery, open space for recreation, nature conservation enhancement, ancillary highway works at Trowers Way and Nutfield Road DRAWING NUMBERS: See attached report

SUMMARY

At the meeting on 13 April 2005 the Committee resolved to defer making a decision on the application in order to receive a presentation on the application, and to visit the site. A presentation on the application was given on 20 April 2005. The site visit was conducted on 7 May 2005. A copy of the previous report is appended with addendum added in italics for ease of use.

A number of concerns were expressed by members of the Committee at the 13 April meeting and subsequent presentation. A summary of these concerns is set out in the attached annexe with additional commentary. The various issues have been discussed with the applicant, who has agreed to amend the application and make other changes in response to members’ concerns. These amendments are set out in more detail in the body of this report.

The principal changes to the application are the inclusion of a medical centre as part of the scheme; acceptance of further modification of draft conditions; and reserving a site for a community facility.

The medical centre would be sited adjacent to the proposed veterinary surgery, close to other employment uses and the central square. It would provide 540 square metres of floorspace on two floors, and could accommodate up to three doctors together with a practice nurse, minor treatment room and space for ancillary staff and patients. While a layout is shown on the submitted plans, this may need to change dependent on the requirements of future occupants. The provision of a medical centre is seen as addressing the principal concern raised by members at the previous meeting.

Other changes are the acceptance by the applicant of further limitations on the hours of delivery of construction materials (condition 3), and agreement to address all the detailed points raised on ground compaction made at the last meeting as part of detailed submissions (condition 19). The applicants have provided a further explanation as to why completion and opening of the spine road prior to occupation of any of the proposed dwellings is not practical, but have suggested a lower trigger point of 75 dwellings, or the end of 2006, whichever is earlier. For the detailed reasons set out in the report, this is considered acceptable and can be secured by further modification of condition 13.

The applicants have also offered to reserve a site for two years for a community facility, but have declined to fund the construction or maintenance of a building. While funding for a building could be diverted from the package of benefits negotiated as part of the development, it would mean that one or more other benefits, such as affordable housing, would have to be foregone. Given the lack of evidence of a need for such a facility, it is considered that the diversion of funding from other identified needs is not justified.

RECOMMENDATION

Subject to:

(a) The application being referred to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister as a departure from the provisions of the development plan and subject to it not being called in within a period of 21 days, or such longer period as may be agreed; and

3. Until the completion of the development hereby permitted, no deliveries, site or building works (including: excavation, construction of the development hereby permitted, tree works, laying of hard surfaces and landscaping of the site) shall be carried on outside the hours of 0800-1800 Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800-1300 hours on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays and Public Holidays. There shall be no deliveries taken at or despatched from the site outside the hours of 0700-1800 Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0700-1300 on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays and Public Holidays. Note: For the avoidance of doubt "Public Holidays" includes New Year's Day, Good Friday, Easter Monday, May Day, Spring Bank Holiday, August Bank Holiday, Christmas Day and Boxing Day. Reason: To ensure that the construction of the development hereby permitted does not unreasonably affect the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring properties or the occupants of earlier phases of properties on the site that have been occupied, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan policy Ho9.

13. No occupation of any of the dwellings hereby permitted shall take place until the junctions with Trowers Way and Nutfield Road have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and the visibility zones included in the design shall not be included in any plot or other sub-division of the site. No occupation in excess of 75 of the dwellings hereby permitted shall take place before the new access road between those junctions has been completed and made available for use. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users. Policy: DN2 1.0 Introduction

1.1 The following report focuses on the specific concerns expressed by Members at the previous Planning Committee meeting and subsequent presentation. However, it is necessary to bear in mind the context in which the application has been submitted, as this forms an important material consideration in determining the application.

1.2 The inadequate access to Holmethorpe Industrial Estate has been recognised for many years, and it has been a long-standing corporate goal of the Council to facilitate the provision of a more suitable means of access to the estate, and reduce heavy goods vehicle movements on the surrounding residential roads.

1.3 It was for this reason that the site was removed from the Green Belt and allocated for employment uses in the Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994, and subsequently for residential use by way of a Development Brief, adopted following public consultation in 2001.

1.4 The Development Brief established the Council’s aspirations for the site. It identified the area of land available for residential development, and the package of measures that were considered to be necessary to support that development. The package of measures included the construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road, but did not seek to limit the quantity of residential development on the site other than by the general constraints on density and housing mix imposed by adopted planning policies and national planning guidance. PPG3 in particular now challenges local planning authorities to make the best use of previously-developed land while securing high quality and attractive residential environments.

1.5 Outline planning permission was granted in October 2002 for residential redevelopment of the site with 400 units. On the strength of that permission, the site was purchased by the current applicant, Linden New Homes Ltd, who began construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road in accordance with the agreement reached with the Council.

1.6 In the course of developing the detailed design of the scheme, including changes in the housing market, the applicant decided to skew the development more towards the smaller end of the market than originally envisaged. This has resulted in a greater number of units proposed for the site, although the total floorspace has only marginally increased. When compared to the outline permission, the current scheme proposes an increase in unit numbers from 400 to 498 (25% increase); while total floorspace increases from 46,450 square metres to 48,030 square metres (3.4% increase).

1.7 The package of transport related and infrastructure benefits accords with that required by the Development Brief. Main public service providers, including health and education authorities, were again consulted as part of the strategic consultation procedures at the outline and detailed planning application stages, but have not indicated any specific need for on-site facilities. Nevertheless, financial contributions were sought and agreed to aid provision of these and other infrastructure and public service requirements.

1.8 It is against this background that the detailed planning of the site was developed. 2.0 Key Issues

2.1 Members have raised a number of concerns with the application proposal. These are further considered in the attached appendix. The various issues have been discussed with the applicant, who has agreed to amend the application and make other changes in response to members’ concerns. These are detailed below.

2.2 The key issues are set out below. The first four issues were raised at the previous committee meeting, while the fifth was raised by a member at the subsequent presentation:

 Provision of a medical centre as part of the development  Control over ground compaction  Timing of completion of the spine road and introduction of a bus service  Limitation on hours of delivery of construction materials  Provision of a community facility

Provision of a Medical Centre

2.3 In response to members’ concerns, the applicant has agreed to provide a medical centre as part of the development. The medical centre would be sited adjacent to the proposed veterinary surgery, close to other employment uses and the central square. It would provide 540 square metres of floorspace on two floors, and could accommodate up to three doctors together with a practice nurse, minor treatment room and space for ancillary staff and patients. While a layout is shown on the submitted plans, this may need to change dependent on the requirements of future occupants. The provision of a medical centre is seen as addressing the principal concern raised by members at the previous meeting.

2.4 The financial contribution earmarked for primary health care would be used to provide this medical facility. As previously advised to the Committee, implementation of the proposal for a medical facility would need the support of the Primary Health Care Trust and also an end user. If, towards the end of the development, no such medical practice were to have come forward, then it would be necessary to revert to securing the financial contribution previously negotiated. A similar situation arose on another large development site at South Goods Yard, Redhill, and can be secured by legal agreement.

2.5 Provision of the medical centre and reserving a site for a community facility (see below) would reduce the amount of commercial development by 764 square metres on the site. Substitution of the commercial development with other uses may give rise to some small change in traffic flows, although these are likely to be insignificant when compared to the size of the remainder of the scheme. Inclusion of a medical centre on the site may have some benefit in reducing local travel movements, which would otherwise have taken place in the locality.

Control over Ground Compaction

2.6 The applicant has given written assurance of their willingness to comply with draft condition 19, which requires submission of a scheme for the compaction and/or stabilisation of the ground for approval by the Council prior to commencement of development. This scheme of working would include the method of ground compaction, monitoring, limit on maximum vibration, and limit on the hours of operation. The applicant is also willing to continue to play their part in the Mere Park Liaison Committee, an informal group including local councillors and residents, which provides a forum for discussion and resolution of detailed concerns.

2.7 Compaction working will be limited to weekdays only, with further details contained in the scheme of working.

2.8 The applicant’s engineering consultants will investigate the research by Cranfield University referred to at the last meeting, with a view to incorporating it if appropriate.

2.9 The applicant is working closely with the Merstham Residents’ Association to address local residents’ concerns on this issue, including taking representatives to see the technique in action. If permission is granted, the applicant is willing to continue their involvement with the Mere Park Liaison Committee to resolve local matters of concern.

Timing of the Spine Road and Bus Service

2.10 Concern was expressed on the timing of the spine road on two grounds. Firstly, that with phasing of the development starting from the eastern end of the site, the burden of traffic movements would fall disproportionately on Merstham during the early phases of the scheme until the spine road was open; and secondly that without the early introduction of the bus service, future occupiers would become accustomed to using private transport.

2.11 Condition 13 as amended requires the spine road to be completed prior to occupation of 125 (one quarter) of dwellings on the site. This figure was chosen because the Traffic Assessment estimates that approximately one quarter of traffic flows from the finished development is likely to access the site from Nutfield Road. The maximum traffic flows that would be made of the Nutfield Road access during the early phases of the scheme would therefore be similar to those predicted once the development was complete.

2.12 The ability to build and occupy some units prior to completion of the spine road is of importance to the applicant. Firstly, give the considerable financial commitments already taken in building the Holmethorpe Relief Road, it is necessary for the developer to secure a return on investment as soon as possible. Secondly, due to existing commitments the sand processing plant will continue in operation until the end of 2005. Demolition of the plant, ground preparation and then construction of the spine road is likely to take up to the end of 2006. Construction and occupation of the first dwellings could take place in Spring of 2006.

2.13 Notwithstanding the desire to bring forward residential development as soon as possible, the applicant has indicated a willingness to accept lower thresholds for the completion of the spine road to occupation of 75 units, or the end of 2006, whichever is sooner. This would ensure that the spine road is open to general residential traffic at an early stage in the development of the scheme before 15% of units are completed. The maximum level of traffic using Nutfield Road during the early phases of the development would also be significantly lower than that predicted for when the development is completed.

2.14 Operation of the bus service through the site is dependent on the completion of the spine road. Lowering the threshold for completion of the spine road would mean that the bus service would operate correspondingly earlier in the scheme, subject to the agreement of the bus company and Surrey County County. Limitation on Hours of Delivery of Construction Materials

2.15 The applicant is agreeable to limiting hours of delivery of construction materials to between 0700-1800 Mondays to Fridays and 0700-1300 on Saturdays, with no working or deliveries on Sundays or Public Holidays. Condition 3 has been reworded accordingly in the recommendation.

Provision of a Community Facility

2.16 A suggestion for the inclusion of a community hall or similar building has been made since the last committee meeting, Having considered the request, the applicant is willing to reserve a site for such a facility adjacent to that of the medical centre. They would reserve the site for a period of two years. No further funding is offered, although the applicants have indicated that they would have no objection to the diversion of funding already agreed within the package of measure set out in the previous report. If funding for the community facility is not secured within two years, the applicants would submit an application for alternative use of the reserved site.

2.17 The provision of a community facility was not identified as a requirement in the Development Brief, nor is it included as a requirement in the outline planning permission granted in 2002. A sum of £150,000 for improving facilities at Battlebridge Boys Club is already committed under existing agreements and cannot be diverted. Other financial contributions set out in the previous report have been negotiated for specific functions or requirements and would be difficult to justify diverting for an alternative purpose. The number of affordable units could be renegotiated to release further funding for a community facility, but given the absence of demand from the existing community, it is considered that this would not be a desirable or appropriate source of funding. Subject Issue Response The developer has agreed to provide a medical centre as Medical centre Need in locality and provision within site part of the scheme (see main report) Ground works The developer has given written assurance that the issues raised by members on monitoring, maximum vibration Ground compaction – noise and vibration to neighbouring limits, and hours of operation will be included within the properties scheme of working required to be submitted for approval by the Authority (see main report)

Raising of ground levels – potential overlooking of See paragraph 6.36 in previous report. neighbouring properties; negating advantages of existing Ground levels have to be raised to provide the necessary bund flood protection within the site. This is equally applicable to either the current residential use, or previously approved commercial use. Ground raising has been kept to the minimum necessary to achieve the Envrionment Agency’s requirements. Ground raising would bring ground levels up to the natural ground level of houses in Nutfield Road and Orpin Road. Due to the height of the majority of the bund and tree belt, most existing and proposed houses on either side of the bund would not be inter-visible, other than at roof level. Where existing and proposed houses would be visible to one another, at the south-eastern end of the site where the bund is lower, separation distances between dwellings would still be over 40 metres, and with the intervening tree belt. This compares favourably with the level of separation normally found in built-up areas, where separation distances down to 21 metres are generally considered to be acceptable. Raising of the bund is not considered to be a viable option, as it would necessitate removing the established trees which have grown up on it. No works to enlarge the bund are known to have taken place since it was first formed. The developer proposes that the timing of the spine road be brought forward to occupation of the 75th dwelling, or Timing of spine road – when available for residential the end of 2006, whichever is earlier (see main report) traffic to access westwards; effect on Merstham A written explanation has been given of why any earlier provision would not be possible given existing contractual Access constraints and health and safety issues. Timing of the bus route follows that of the spine road. The applicants are willing to support the operation of the bus Timing of bus route – provision in relation to new service on opening of the spine road. Commencement of dwellings a bus service is also dependent on agreement with the bus operator and Surrey County Council Transport See paragraphs 6.10-6.17 of previous report. A transportation assessment has been submitted as part of the detailed application. This assesses the traffic generation potential of the development and its effect on the surrounding road network. It includes assessment of the current scheme based on 498 dwellings, together with Impact of additional traffic generation on surrounding road the other mixed uses. network The transport assessment concludes that, subject to the package of highway changes and transport improvements included in the S106 agreement, traffic generated by the scheme can be accommodated satisfactorily on the local road network. The Highway Authority agrees with the conclusions of the transport assessment. Off-site highway works – Frenches Road closure Off-site highway works do not form part of the current application, although funding for their implementation would be secured by way of the S106 agreement. Independent consultation and scrutiny of individual highway schemes is subject to separate legislation and procedures. Surrey County Council and Reigate and Banstead Borough Council issued a joint statement on 13 April 2005 regarding the closure of Frenches Road. The County Council has undertaken to monitor road safety and traffic flow on the new relief road and surrounding roads for six months, and review the situation at the end of that period. The Holmethorpe Relief Road is expected to be opened to through traffic by 23 May 2005. Should severe traffic problems occur after the relief road has been opened, the position will be reviewed more urgently. See paragraph 6.15 of previous report. The proposed parking provision is at the upper end of the maximum parking standards adopted by the Council, with an average of 1.43 spaces per dwelling compared to the Parking provision – whether adequate maximum average of 1.5 spaces per dwelling. Similarly parking provision for the other mixed uses is either at or near the maximum standards that appertain for those uses. It is not anticipated that on-street parking would cause obstruction to traffic flows along the spine road, due to its design and the amount of parking provision planned for the scheme. Once built the spine road is intended to be On-street parking – effect on traffic flows along spine road offered for adoption by the Highway Authority. The Authority would therefore be able to use its statutory powers to impose parking restrictions along all or part of the road, should on-street parking prove to cause an unacceptable degree of obstruction. Monitoring of traffic flows – how to be secured Traffic flows along the spine road are intended to be monitored by a remote camera and number plate recognition technology. This system is in operation at another site developed by the applicants. Surrey County Council as Education Authority for the area have been consulted on the application, and has not identified a need for a school on the site. A substantial financial contribution of £690,040 has been negotiated for Infrastructure Education – extra demand on local schools the provision or improvement of off-site educational facilities. This would aid the Education Authority in planning for suitable capacity to accommodate additional educational demands arising out of the development. See paragraph 6.27 of the previous report. An additional plan indicating in clearer detail the extent and location of recreational facilities and land proposed for the site has been submitted. This meets or exceeds the requirements for recreation space set out in the Recreation land – amount and position Council’s supplementary planning guidance ‘Outdoor Playing Space Provision’. Other recreational land and facilities are accessible from the site, including Battlebridge Recreation Ground, the Merstham Recreation Ground, Brook Road Open Space, and The Moors to the south. The applicant has agreed to reserve a site for a Community facility – whether community hall required community hall (see main report). See paragraph 6.38 of the previous report. A local Development Plan Document setting out the Energy efficiency Encourage greater energy efficiency Council’s policy on energy efficiency is included for future preparation within the Development Plan Scheme. Prior to the Council developing its own energy policy, on Structure Plan policy Water feature How fed and maintained See paragraph 6.23 of the previous report. The water feature would be continuously fed from a borehole in the north-west corner of the site (plan 500- 700) and by recycling water from the northern lagoon. This would ensure a constant flow of water through the system irrespective of flows in Gatton Brook. The financial contributions negotiated are based on those agreed at the outline stage, increased in proportion to the Financial Whether take account of increased number of dwellings greater number of residential units; and also increased in contributions line with inflation since the grant of outline permission in 2002. See revised condition 3 and paragraph 2.12 of the main report. Hours of delivery Further limit on hours of delivery The applicant has accepted a further restriction on hours of delivery to 0700-1800 Mondays to Fridays, 0700-1300 on Saturdays, and not at all on Sundays or Public Holidays. Density of scheme Effect of additional units on density and building mass of See paragraphs 6.18-6.20 of the previous report. scheme The applicant has significantly increased the proportion of small units (one and two-bedroom) in the development from that envisaged at the outline stage from 25% to 53%. This has resulted in a greater number of units proposed for the site, although the total floorspace has only marginally increased. When compared to the outline permission, the current scheme proposes an increase in unit numbers from 400 to 498 (25% increase); while total floorspace increases from 46,450 square metres to 48,030 square metres (3.4% increase). The density of the scheme at 40 dwellings per hectare falls in the middle of the density range of 30-50 dwellings per hectare encouraged by PPG3 for new residential development. See paragraph 6.20 of the previous report The mix and tenure of affordable housing has been negotiated and agreed with the Council’s Housing Affordable housing Mix of affordable units sizes Department, and reflects housing need in the area. The development would secure 30% of units as affordable, which is higher than the 25% can normally be achieved. The area of land for development reflects that identified in the Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994. While development of the land is linked to funding construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road, the amount of development within the site is not determined by the financial cost of funding the relief road, but by the Need for Size of development needed to support construction of requirements of the Development Brief and by the general development Holmethorpe Relief Road constraints on density and housing mix imposed by adopted planning policies and national planning guidance. PPG3 in particular now requires local planning authorities to make the best use of previously-developed land while securing high quality and attractive residential environments. This is consistent with the way that development is controlled throughout the Borough. REPORT TO COMMITTEE MEETING OF 13 APRIL 2005 WITH ADDENDUM ADDED IN ITALICS

REPORT OF: HEAD OF BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AUTHOR: Guy Davies TELEPHONE: 01737 276173 E-MAIL: [email protected] TO: PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 13 April 2005 AGENDA ITEM: [8]

APPLICATION NO: 04/02411/F WARD RE RECEIVED: 07/10/04 : APPLICANT: Linden New Homes Ltd AGENT: David Lock Associates Ltd LOCATION: LAND AT HOLMETHORPE QUARRY (MERE PARK), REDHILL DESCRIPTION 498 dwellings, light industrial units, local shop, veterinary surgery, : nursing care home, children’s day nursery, open space for recreation, nature conservation enhancement, ancillary highway works at Trowers Way and Nutfield Road DRAWING NUMBERS: See below HR001A, 002A, 010C, 011R, 021A, 022A, 023A (location, site and site sections) HR101C-105C, 106D-108D, 109B, 110A, 111B, 112A (apartment block floor plans) HR120B-131B, 132C, 133B-138B, 139C, 140C, 141B-144B (house types floor plans) HR201C-204C, 205B, 206B, 207D, 208C, 209, 210A, 211 (apartment block elevations) HR220B-249B, 250C, 251C, 252B-258B (house types elevations) HR300-318 (garage, bike and bin stores) 4654/001D, 002A, 003A, 004C, 005 (commercial units) L3501/01B, 02, 03 (nursing home) HR502B, 512B (veterinary surgery) HR 504A, 515 (children’s day nursery) 700-200C (visibility splays) 900-001C (limit of works plan) 097/004A, 005, 006A, 007A, 008A, 009, 010 (landscaping) 100-980C, 1071A, 1024E (cross sections) 500-700 (position of borehole)

SUMMARY

Outline planning permission was granted for residential development of 400 houses on the site in October 2002 subject to a Section 106 legal agreement. The permission was granted as a departure from the development plan, but in accordance with a development brief adopted by the Borough Council in 2001. The development brief supported the residential development of the site as a means of funding the Holmethorpe Relief Road, as well as securing additional planning and environmental benefits for the area. No objection to the departure was raised by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. The same policy considerations apply to the current application. While the application would still be a departure from the development plan, the principle of residential development is supported by the adopted development brief and accepted by the grant of outline planning permission in October 2002. There have been no material changes to warrant a different view being taken on the principle of residential redevelopment, and the scheme has a large measure of support from residents and businesses alike. Subsequent ministerial advice and changes to the Surrey Structure Plan have supported the reuse of commercial and industrial land for residential purposes.

The main differences between the current scheme and the previous outline permission are that the number of residential dwellings has increased from 400 to 498, and the application includes a number of other uses including 14 commercial units, a shop, a veterinary surgery, a nursing home, and a children’s day nursery; and the course of the Gatton Brook has been altered. In all other respects, the current scheme remains similar to that granted in outline.

The current application conforms to all the major aspirations of the development brief for the site. It would secure the construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road together with a package of other highway improvement measures, reduce heavy goods vehicle movements in the surrounding road network, provide housing of an appropriate mix to help meet the Borough’s housing allocation, secure 30% of dwellings as affordable units, dedicate land for recreation and nature conservation use, and secure financial contributions towards education, health, public transport, and local community facilities.

While the growth in dwelling numbers would increase traffic, the Highway Authority is satisfied that subject to the package of transportation measures, the development can be accommodated in transportation terms. The detailed layout and design of the scheme follows principles set out in Surrey Design and the Council’s own Local Distinctiveness Guide. It seeks to create an attractive and accessible scheme, with a legible and connected layout linking a series of different zones, each with their own distinctive sense of place.

For these reasons, it is considered that a departure from the development plan is justified.

RECOMMENDATION

Subject to:

(b) The prior completion (within six months of the date of the resolution, or such longer period as may be agreed by the Head of Building and Development Services) of all documentation required to create a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to secure a package of planning benefits including:  The prior construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road;  On-site transport provisions and initiatives including £527,750 towards a bus service through the site as set out in the report;  A financial contribution of £690,040 toward education provision within the Redhill and Reigate area;  A financial contribution of £65,705 toward primary health care provision within the Redhill and Reigate area;  Recreational and open space provision;  Nature conservation enhancement;  A financial contribution of £150,000 towards local community facilities;  30% of all housing (147 units) to be affordable housing as set out in the report; and  The payment of the Council’s legal costs for drafting this obligation

Planning permission is GRANTED subject to conditions. Consultations:

Highway Authority: no objection subject to conditions.

Environment Agency: initial objection is now withdrawn following amendments to the alignment of the Gatton Brook and the position of commercial units. Proximity of veterinary building still closer than preferred, but acknowledge that the applicant has provided as much access as possible.

Surrey Wildlife Trust: no objection following amendments and additional information on the nature conservation aspects of the scheme.

Holmethorpe Estate Association: question the ability of proposed highway changes to accommodate additional traffic, and raise concerns about other changes in the Holmethorpe Industrial Estate (Note: these latter changes do not form part of the application).

Thames Water: surface and foul water drainage has been agreed with the applicant. Suitable sewerage infrastructure will not be in place prior to May 2006.

Surrey County Council (Strategic Planning): no objection to the principle of the development for housing and mixed uses, or to the overall density and design, or to the strategic transport implications. The Borough Council should satisfy itself with the development in relation to the Green Belt boundary; and consider the proportion of affordable housing and use of renewable energy within the development.

Transco (gas utility): no objection.

Merstham Residents’ Association: object to the increase in the number of dwellings because of the additional demands on local infrastructure and public services; the change in the mix of units towards a greater number of smaller units reducing the prestige of the development; lack of agreement with Association on security and planting on the northern bund; absence of detail on the proposed traffic management measures at New Battlebridge Lane Railway Bridge (note: this does not form part of the application); and remain unconvinced that the development will not adversely affect utility services.

Surrey Police: no adverse observations.

Surrey County Council Rights of Way Officer: no objection.

Tandridge District Council: no objection subject to permission being granted for the relocation of the sand processing works (note: it has), and the Highway Authority raising no objections with regards to the highway network in Tandridge.

The Reigate Society: welcomes the scheme, but would like to a northern footpath link still considered and expresses some concern over the modern house designs.

Representations:

Over 450 individual properties were notified by letters on 15/10/04 and 28/01/05, site notices posted 15/11/04 and the application advertised in a local newspaper on 28/10/05. 22 representations were received from 21 different addresses raising the following issues: Issue Number Response Drainage/sewage 7 See paragraphs 6.31-6.34 Harm to Green Belt/rural area 1 See paragraph 6.26 Harm to wildlife habitat 1 See condition 9 Hazard to highway safety 1 See paragraphs 6.10 – 6.17 Health fears 1 See paragraph 6.36 Inconvenience during construction 4 See paragraph 6.36 Increase in traffic/congestion 12 See paragraphs 6.10 – 6.17 Loss of/inadequate parking 1 See paragraph 6.15 Noise & disturbance 4 See paragraph 6.36 Out of keeping with density and layout 2 See paragraphs 6.18 – 6.30 Over development 4 See paragraphs 6.18 – 6.20 Overbearing 3 See paragraph 6.36 Privacy/overlooking 2 See paragraph 6.36 Concern at ground compaction 13 See paragraph 6.37 Pressure on local services 11 See paragraph 6.35 Relocation of the width restriction 1 See paragraph 6.10

1.0 Site and Surroundings

1.1 The application site of some 27 hectares is located approximately 1.5 kilometres north east of Redhill town centre, between the embankment of the fast London to Brighton railway line and Nutfield Road. To the north, beyond a well-established bund, lie residential roads in Merstham fronting Nutfield Road and Orpin Road. To the west, on the opposite side of the railway line, lies the Holmethorpe Industrial Estate. To the south and east lies open countryside. Further to the south, on the opposite side of the shallow valley of the Redhill Brook, is a former mineral quarry now being backfilled with waste.

1.2 The majority of the site has previously been worked for sand, and is backfilled with inert waste. It is currently being used for the processing, stockpiling and distribution of sand, worked from active sand quarries lying to the east within Tandridge district. The sand processing plant and ancillary buildings stand in the south west corner of the site. To the south are two large lagoons used to store and recycle water as part of the industrial process.

1.3 Access is gained under a high arched bridge under the railway line from Trowers Way; and also from Nutfield Road.

1.4 In the north western corner of the sand quarry, but lying outside the application site, is a small commercial estate (Quarryside Business Park) that gains access via Trowers Way under the same high arched bridge as the application site.

2.0 Relevant History

2.1 Relevant planning history is as follows: RE92P/0560 (On land adjacent) Construction of new Granted 24/06/93 access road to serve Holmethorpe (Under construction) Industrial Estate RE93P/0905 Erection of 26,477 square metres of Granted 10/11/95 Class B1 and B8 commercial and (Not implemented) storage or distribution uses (On land adjacent) Holmethorpe Relief Confirmed 10/08/00 Road Compulsory Purchase Order 1996 01/02552/OUT Residential development of 400 Granted 08/10/02 dwellings, employment development, subject to S106 public open space and nature Agreement conservation together with new/improved access and southern link road 04/02887/DED Demolition of Ormside bungalow Approved 04/01/05 (Implemented)

3.0 Current Proposal

3.1 This is a full application for development of the site with 498 residential dwellings, 14 light industrial units, a shop, a veterinary surgery with ancillary staff accommodation, a 78-bed nursing home, and a children’s day nursery for up to 70 children. In addition, the application includes open space for public recreation, informal and equipped play areas, two recycling “bring sites”, and open space for nature conservation.

3.2 Access to the site would continue to be gained from Trowers Way and Nutfield Road, and subject to associated highway works to improve the two access points. A Section 106 Agreement would secure funding for other off-site highway works, subject to separate consents and/or traffic regulation orders. Further details are given below.

3.3 To accommodate these works, the course of the Gatton Brook, currently in a culvert under the site, would be diverted along the eastern side of the railway line before reverting to a more meandering course emptying in to the northern lagoon. The existing well-established bund along the northern and north eastern boundaries of the site would be retained.

3.4 Part of the application to demolish a dilapidated bungalow adjacent to the sand processing works has since been superseded by demolition under a separate consent.

3.5 In addition to the detailed plans, further information has been provided in the form of an Environmental Statement submitted with the application. This suite of documents updates and builds upon an earlier Environmental Statement submitted with the outline application for residential development of the site. The Environmental Statement and supporting studies include:  A non-technical summary  Report of public consultation  Archaeology  Ground and surface water drainage  A flood risk assessment  A transportation assessment update report  A landscape report  A quarry remediation strategy  Specification for a Nature Conservation Area  Noise and air quality reports  Utilities and services

3.6 Further details of the development are as follows:

Site area 27.4 hectares Development area 12.5 hectares Public Open Space 2.8 hectares Nature Conservation 9.5 hectares Northern Bund 1.7 hectares

Existing use Sand processing works (Class B2)

Proposed uses Residential (Class C3) Commercial (Class B1) Shop (Class A1) Veterinary Surgery (Class D1) Nursing Home (Class C2) Children’s Day Nursery (Class D1) Proposed parking spaces 711 (residential) 50 (commercial) 15 (veterinary surgery) 10 (retail shop) 17 (nursing home) 14 (day nursery)

Parking standards (maximum) Residential 1.5 spaces per dwelling (average) Commercial 1 space per 30 square metres Retail 1 space per 30 square metres Nursing Home 1 space per 2 residents Day Nursery 0.2 spaces per child plus 0.75 per staff Veterinary Surgery 4 spaces per consulting room

Number of dwellings demolished 1

Proposed number of dwellings 498 (further details below) Proposed affordable dwellings 147 (further details below) = 30% Total increase in dwellings 497 Proposed site density 40 dwellings per hectare Proposed commercial floor space 1682 square metres Proposed veterinary floor space 445 square metres Proposed shop floor space 418 square metres Proposed nursing home floor space 3384 square metres Day nursery floor space 557 square metres Details of Proposed Dwellings Unit Type Open Market Affordable Type Total One bedroom flats 33 24 57 Two bedroom flats 62 58 120 Two bedroom houses 36 51 87 Three bedroom houses 121 12 133 Four bedroom houses 99 2 101 Totals 351 147 498

3.7 The application is offered with a comprehensive package of transportation measures and contributions towards infrastructure and public service improvements, which would be secured by way of a Section 106 legal agreement. The main proposed heads of agreement are:  Highway improvements - Construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road, including rail underbridge - A new junction of Battlebridge Lane with Frenches Road - Restriction on use of Frenches Road - The closure of the junction of Fairhaven Road with the A23 London Road South - Modification and relocation of the Nutfield Road width restriction - Footpath and junction improvements to Holmethorpe Avenue bridge - Traffic calming on Frenches Road - Traffic management measures at Trowers Way Bridge - Modification of the junction of Trowers Way and Ormside Way - Widening of Ormside Way - A new junction of Frenches Road with the Holmethorpe Relief Road - Formation of a shared cycleway and footpath linking to the National Cycle Route - A commuted sum for maintenance of new traffic signals  Provision of a car park to replace on-street parking in the Holmethorpe Industrial Estate  Funding of travel vouchers for new residents of £200 per dwelling  Monitoring of through traffic flows and installation of traffic control measures if necessary  A contribution of £527,750 towards the provision of bus service through the site  A contribution of £690,040 towards education provision in the locality  A contribution of £65,705 towards primary health care provision in the locality  Provision of formal and informal play areas and recreation space on site  Provision of a nature conservation area on site  A contribution of £150,000 towards community facilities to be provided at the Battlebridge Boys Club  Affordable housing at 30% of total provision 3.8 The current application conforms to all the aspirations of the development brief for the site, other than in two respects. Firstly, the land proposed for development does not include Quarryside Business Park, this being outside the ownership of the applicant. Secondly, it does not include any proposal for a footway/cycleway through the northern bund because of concerns previously expressed by local residents. Neither of these elements was included as part of the outline planning permission, and to this extent the current proposal is consistent with what has already been permitted.

4.0 Policy Context

4.1 Local Plan Designation

Urban Area (northern part) Metropolitan Green Belt (southern part) Land excluded from the Green Belt (south western part) Land reserved for Industrial, Storage and Distribution Uses Site safeguarded for Aggregate Depot Use Area of High Ecological Quality (southern part) Proposed Site of Nature Conservation Interest (southern part)

4.2 Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1993

Restoration P4, P5, P28, P29

4.3 Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994

Landscape and Nature Conservation Pc2, Pc4 Metropolitan Green Belt Co1 Housing Ho2, Ho3, Ho9, Ho10, Ho21 Employment Em1, Em2, Em3, Em9 Recreation Re2, Re3, Re5, Re6 Community Facilities Cf5 Utilities Ut1, Ut3, Ut4 Movement Mo4, Mo5, Mo6, Mo7, Mo9, Mo12, Mo13

4.4 Surrey Structure Plan 2004

The Location of Development LO1, LO2, LO4, LO6, LO7 Sustaining the Environment SE2, SE3, SE4, SE6, SE7, SE8, SE9, SE10 Infrastructure and Development Needs DN1, DN2, DN3, DN4, DN5, DN10, DN11, DN12, DN13, DN15, DN17

4.5 Local Plan First Alteration 2000 (incorporating proposed modifications)

Nature Conservation Pc2D Metropolitan Green Belt Co 1 Housing Ho2, Ho3, Ho9 Recreation Re 6 Movement Mo7

4.6 Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance Notes PPS1, PPG2, PPG3, PPS7, PPG13, RPG9, MPG7 Circular Guidance 1/97, 6/98 Supplementary Planning Guidance Surrey Design Local Distinctiveness Design Guide A Parking Strategy for Surrey Parking Standards for Development Outdoor Playing Space Provision Affordable Housing Provision Other Human Rights Act 1998 Development Brief – Land at Holmethorpe

5.0 Planning Background

5.1 The inadequate access to Holmethorpe Industrial Estate has been recognised for many years, and it has been a long-standing objective of the Council to facilitate the provision of a more suitable means of access to the estate, and reduce heavy goods vehicle movements on the surrounding residential roads. The development also contributes to meeting the Council’s housing allocation in the Surrey Structure Plan.

5.2 To provide funding for the relief road, the majority of the site was removed from the Green Belt and allocated for employment uses in the Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994. Industrial use was considered to be the most appropriate use at the time given that some sand processing activities were then expected to remain. Planning permission was granted in 1995 for industrial, storage and distribution uses subject to a legal agreement requiring provision of the Holmethorpe Relief Road. Compulsory purchase orders acquiring the land necessary for the relief road and other highway improvements were confirmed following a public inquiry in 2000.

5.3 Despite extensive marketing, the commercial permission was not taken up and it became necessary to consider alternative uses of the site. The opportunity arose for the sand processing operation to relocate to North Park Farm (in Tandridge district), although cessation of the processing use on the current application site was independently agreed between the operator and landowner, and is not dependent on the other permission being implemented. As a result, residential use was considered to be the most appropriate alternative use on the site that had the potential to fund the relief road and other environmental benefits.

5.4 A development brief was duly published and, following extensive public consultation, adopted by the Council in October 2001. The brief supports the residential development of the site as a departure from the employment policies set out in the 1994 Local Plan, subject to it funding the construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road and a range of other planning benefits, including the provision of additional infrastructure and public service improvements.

5.5 Outline planning permission was granted in October 2002 for the residential redevelopment of the site. A subsequent judicial review of the decision by the landowner of the adjacent Park 25 (former Foxboro’ Works site) was withdrawn in early 2003. Construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road began in late 2004, with the new bridge under the slow railway line being inserted over the following Christmas period.

6.0 Principal Issues 6.1 The main issues are considered to be:

 Adopted policy and the development brief  Traffic impact and transport requirements  Housing density and mix  Layout and design  Flooding and drainage  Other infrastructure requirements

Adopted policy and the development brief

6.2 The site is reserved for industrial, storage and distribution uses under Borough Local Plan policy Em9. In addition, the sand processing works is a site safeguarded for an aggregates depot by Surrey Minerals Plan policy P28. While both of these plans are now over 10 years old and due for replacement, they remain part of the adopted development plan for the site. Development of the site for uses other than those specified in these two policy designations would therefore be a departure from the development plan.

6.3 For the reasons summarised in section 5 above, the Council considered that there were sound and justified planning reasons for departing from these planning policies, and adopted a development brief supporting the residential development of the site in 2001, subject to that development funding construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road and generating additional planning benefits, including infrastructure and public service improvements to support the increased population.

6.4 Outline planning permission was subsequently granted in October 2002 for residential development, as a departure from the development plan, following no objection being raised to the scheme by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. A subsequent legal challenge on one procedural and five substantive points was later withdrawn.

6.5 The same policy considerations apply to the current application. While a departure from the development plan for the reasons set out above, the principle of residential development of the site is supported by the adopted development brief, and has a large measure of support from residents and businesses alike. The principle of residential development of the site was further confirmed by the Council with the grant of outline planning permission in 2002, and by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s decision not to call the application in for determination.

6.6 This decision has subsequently been supported by changes in national planning guidance and County strategic policy, in part driven by a greater emphasis on the need to accommodate residential development on previously developed land. PPG3 “Housing” requires local planning authorities to assess the development potential of sites for housing, and encourages authorities to follow a search sequence starting with the re-use of previously developed land and buildings within urban areas. This advice was amplified in a ministerial statement in April 2003 where it was advised that, unless there was a convincing case otherwise, local authorities should allow land allocated for industrial or commercial purposes to be used for housing development.

6.7 Draft changes to PPG3 published in July 2003 for consultation purposes propose that local planning authorities should review all their non-housing allocations when reviewing their plans and consider whether some of this land might be better used for housing; and that local authorities should allow land currently allocated for industrial and commercial purposes to be used for housing unless a convincing case for retention can be made. This latter draft change would reverse the current policy stance and introduce a preference in favour of redeveloping industrial sites for residential purposes. This changed emphasis on safeguarding employment land has been incorporated in Structure Plan policy LO7, which includes the requirement that Surrey authorities will be expected to review existing employment land allocations and reallocate surplus or unsuitably located employment land for alternative uses. The supporting text suggests that authorities will have to consider whether some employment sites should therefore be used for housing to help increase labour supply to meet the demands of the local economy.

6.8 As with the outline planning permission, none of the detailed legal objections raised in 2002 are considered to justify the Council taking a different view to that contained in the adopted development brief. The scheme is considered to comply with the advice in PPG3. The large majority of the site falls to be considered as previously- developed land in the built-up area, is available for development, is considered suitable for housing, and is considered to meet the criteria set out in paragraphs 31 and 38 of PPG3. It has been a long-standing objective of developing the land to fund construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road. Linking the two is considered to be directly related to the development, to which it would form the main point of access. It is therefore considered to meet the guidance in Circular 1/97 on the use of planning obligations. While supplementary planning guidance is expected to be consistent with the development plan, it has always been made clear in the development brief that residential use of the site would be a departure, and the proposal was considered on this basis. The Council took independent advice on the viability of the employment use of the site, and was satisfied that following testing of the market, there was insufficient demand to support funding of the Holmethorpe Relief Road. An objection relating to compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations no longer applies as the application is submitted in detailed form.

6.9 Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that applications for planning permission are determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposed redevelopment the site for residential purposes conflicts with development plan policies Em9 and P28, although other material considerations in the form of the development brief for the site, and the outline grant of planning permission in October 2002, justify making a decision counter to those policies. Such a decision is supported by national planning guidance in PPG3, draft changes proposed to that guidance note, and Structure Plan policy LO7, which all place a different emphasis on safeguarding employment land. Favourable consideration of the application would be a departure from the development plan, but is considered to be justified by the benefits identified in this report.

Traffic Impact and Transport Requirements

6.10 Access to the site would be via Trowers Way to the west and Nutfield Road to the east. Both access points would be redesigned to ease traffic flows, with traffic control measures through the high arch bridge from Trowers Way, and a mini- roundabout at the junction with Nutfield Road. The existing width restriction on Nutfield Road would be moved to the south of the junction, to limit heavy goods vehicles entering Merstham from the south.

6.11 The application is accompanied by an updated traffic impact assessment. The Highway Authority concludes that, subject to the package of transportation measures set out in paragraph 3.7, the proposed development including the increased number of dwellings and other uses can be accommodated in transportation terms. The development would inevitably increase vehicular traffic on the local roads, but the wider changes to the road network, in particular the construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road and measures to encourage greater use of public transport, would help address the consequent transport demands of the development.

6.12 Residential development of the site, and construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road, would also benefit the surrounding area by significantly reducing the number of heavy goods vehicle movements in Frenches Road, and in Nutfield Road, and the rural area to the east through cessation of sand processing on the site and the ‘grace and favour’ use of the haul route by high sided vehicles destined for the Holmethorpe Industrial Estate.

6.13 The majority of the highway works are off-site and do not form part of the application, although funding would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement. Most of the proposed highway works have already been the subject of separate consents or traffic regulation orders, which have or will give residents the opportunity to comment in detail on each scheme.

6.14 One significant change from the outline planning permission for residential development granted in October 2002 is that it is no longer proposed to include a mechanical means of traffic control within the scheme. Previously it had been considered desirable to prevent general traffic ‘rat running’ through the site by the use of a barrier or similar means of control. Following a reassessment of the detailed layout of the scheme, experience of barrier control mechanisms at Royal Earlswood, and the complicated nature of traffic control that would be necessary, it has been concluded that it is preferable not to rely on such means of control. Instead the main spine road through the scheme has been designed to limit vehicle speeds through traffic calming and other speed reduction measures, in order to deter non-estate traffic. However, it is also considered necessary to require the applicant to monitor traffic flows on the main spine road to determine whether these measures are sufficient, and if not to revise the means of traffic control, which may take the form of a mechanical barrier. These requirements have been agreed in principle with the applicant and can be secured as additional provisions in the Section 106 Agreement.

6.15 Parking provision has been designed to meet current national planning guidance in PPG3 and PPG13, as well as County and Borough parking standards. Parking provision for the residential development averages 1.43 spaces per dwelling, just under the maximum average of 1.5 spaces per dwelling allowed by the adopted standard, with 637 allocated spaces and 74 visitor spaces. The number of parking spaces assigned to non-residential uses is set out in paragraph 3.6 above, and also fall within maximum adopted standards.

6.16 The one transport element proposed in the development brief not included in the scheme is the provision of a footpath/cycleway through the established bund on the northern boundary of the site. This proposal was strongly opposed by local residents when the outline planning application was under consideration, as it would require a cutting through the bund with consequent losses of trees, screening and feeling of insecurity for properties on the northern side of the bund. The same considerations apply to this application. The road and footpath layout within the scheme would however allow for such a linkage if it were considered to be desirable in the future. A proposal for a shared footpath/cycleway linking the site to the national cycle route that runs to the south remains part of the scheme. 6.17 Having regard to the advice of the Highway Authority, and the adopted development brief for the site, it is concluded that, subject to the package of measures outlined in paragraph 3.7, the traffic generated by the development would not have a materially adverse effect upon the surrounding road network. The package of measures offered is considered to accord with the guidance provided in PPG3, PPG13 and development plan policies relating to transport.

Housing Density and Mix

6.18 The application proposes a density of some 40 dwellings per hectare. This accords with the 30-50 dwellings per hectare density range for new development on previously developed land encouraged by PPG3, and accepted in the adopted development brief. The sustainable location of the site within walking distance of local shops at Merstham, 1.5 kilometres of Redhill town centre and the bus and train stations, supports the proposed density.

6.19 PPG3 and Local Plan policies Ho2 and Ho3 seek to provide a range of dwelling types and sizes, in order to create balanced communities. Housing need in the Borough indicates a requirement for smaller dwellings due to the fall in the average size of households. This is emphasised in draft Local Plan policy Ho3, which requires that on suitable sites, residential schemes incorporate a significant proportion of one or two bedroom units. The proposed housing mix meets the requirements of these policies with a range of dwelling sizes from one and two bedroom flats to two, three and four bedroom houses. 53% of the dwellings would be one or two bedrooms in size. This proportion of smaller dwellings is considered to comfortably meet the requirements of the policies detailed above.

6.20 Because of the size of the development, national planning guidance in Circular 6/98, Structure Plan DN11, Local Plan policy Ho2 and draft Local Plan policy Ho2 all support a proportion of the dwellings being affordable housing. In this case, 147 of the dwellings, equating to 30% of units, have been negotiated to be affordable, with an agreed range of sizes and tenure types secured by way of a Section 106 Agreement. The affordable housing would be provided in small groups, located throughout the development and of the same type and quality as the market housing. The proportion of affordable houses is higher than that normally secured under policy Ho3, as an additional planning benefit of the scheme. Having regard to the policies referred to above and the circumstances of the site, this proportion is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with circular guidance and the adopted development brief.

Layout and Design

6.21 The approach to the layout of the site follows principles set out in PPG3, Surrey Design and the Council’s own Local Distinctiveness Guide. It responds positively to the land use constraints and opportunities of the site, and seeks to create an attractive and accessible place, in which a sense of community can develop.

6.22 Orientation of the dwellings in an south-east/south-west direction maximises passive solar gain as well as making the most of views out over adjoining countryside, while avoiding direct views of the land-fill site due south. The road system is based on a grid pattern, which maximises permeability and accessibility through the site. A central road through the site from east to west would provide the route for the bus service, and is designed to be accessible to all dwellings in the scheme. It would be traffic calmed through its design and the use of table ramps at junctions. Views are developed along this main spine route with vistas either stopped by feature buildings or allowed to widen out over the surrounding countryside. The smaller residential streets and squares are designed to give pedestrians priority.

6.23 The site has been divided into a number of different zones, in which the housing layout, building design and the design of street features all reinforce a distinctive sense of place. A central water feature forms an important element of the design, changing its character along its route from the north western corner of the site to the northern lagoon to reflect the formal or informal nature of the zones through which it passes. The height and massing of buildings is designed to reflect the hierarchy of roads in the scheme, with higher densities and 3-4 storey heights around the main square and along the main routes, decreasing to lower densities and more domestic scale buildings in the smaller squares and streets.

6.24 The detailed scheme includes a variety of non-residential uses, which add variety and vitality to the development. The opportunity to work in close proximity to the site, and the provision of a shop and children’s day nursery in particular would provide local facilities that reduce the need for travel.

6.25 In terms of building design, the site is unusual in that it is almost completely contained visually from the surrounding area. This has allowed the designers a greater degree of flexibility in incorporating a wide range of different building styles and designs into the scheme. These range from modern three-and-a-half town houses fronting a reflecting pool along the western side of the main spine route, to more traditional pitched roofed, gabled-ended family housing elsewhere in the scheme.

6.26 Along the southern edge, the designers have sought to create an informal and un- regimented boundary, with well spaced, part weather-board clad buildings providing a degree of transition between the developed part of the site and the open land to the south. As a consequence of this design approach the line of development varies either side of the nominal Green Belt boundary as defined in the Local Plan 1994, with a marginal benefit in favour of open land. While the extension of development over the nominal Green Belt boundary in two small areas would technically be a departure from Green Belt policy, there is in practice a net gain in openness, and more importantly the design approach taken would enhance the transition between the built development and the Green Belt. These factors are considered to amount to very special circumstances clearly outweighing the nominal harm to Green Belt policy in this instance.

6.27 Some three hectares of formal and informal recreation space would be provided as part of the scheme. This would include a playing pitch in the south-west corner of the site, informal recreation land further to the south and around the boundaries of the site, local areas for play within the scheme, and an equipped children’s playground to the north of the playing field, close to the position of the proposed children’s day nursery. These recreational facilities meet the terms of Local Plan policy Re6 as informed by the Council’s supplementary planning guidance on outdoor playing space provision.

6.28 The existing well-established northern bund would be retained as a landscape feature on the site. The applicants have also entered into discussions with local residents about regularising the use of an informal pedestrian access along the rear boundaries of houses in Nutfield Road and Orpin Road.

6.29 The two lagoons and associated land lying to the south of the site would become designated as a nature conservation area, with enhanced planting and landscaping designed to encourage a wide range of native flora and fauna. The applicant has reached agreement with Surrey Wildlife Trust for its future management and maintenance, in conjunction with The Moors (floodplain of the Redhill Brook), which abuts the site to the south. The nature conservation area would be fenced with restricted access in order to establish the right environment for wildlife.

6.30 Further landscaping is proposed along the southern side of Trowers Way approaching the high arch bridge to improve the amenity of the western approach to the site.

Flooding and Drainage

6.31 Part of the site is indicated on Environment Agency maps to have a 1% risk of fluvial flooding, although hydrological conditions affecting the site are likely to have altered as a result of sand extraction over the years. To address this concern, a detailed flood risk assessment, including measurement of ground water conditions was carried out as part of the Environmental Assessment. This study shows that the area to be developed with buildings does not form part of the functional floodplain of the Redhill Brook. However, part of the south eastern corner of the site is below the relevant 1% flood level, although it is separated by areas of higher ground and bunding. The flooding issue in this part of the site is to be addressed by raising the ground level by approximately three metres at its highest, including a 0.6 metre freeboard to the underside of ground floor slab levels, grading back down to existing ground level towards the central and western part of the site. Because all parts of the site in which ground raising is proposed lie outside the floodplain, there is no requirement for flood compensation. Re-grading of land in the south west corner of the site to allow recreational use would be carried out to ensure no net loss of flood plain capacity.

6.32 Gatton Brook currently enters the north western corner of the site via a culvert under the railway line embankment, passes in culvert through Quarryside Business Park and the sand processing works before emptying into the northern lagoon. It is proposed to reopen the Gatton Brook where it passes through the site, in line with Environment Agency requirements. Following detailed study of the variation in the annual flow rate of Gatton Brook, ground levels, and discussions with the Environment Agency, the applicant has decided to take the central water feature off- line, and redirect Gatton Brook in a separate open channel running along the side of the railway embankment, before it changes to a more natural meandering route emptying into the northern lagoon.

6.33 The new channel has been designed to accommodate additional flows as defined by a catchment area study, to cater for the possibility of up-stream channel improvements in future years. The positions of the proposed commercial and other buildings along the length of the channel have also been amended to ensure adequate room for maintenance on both banks of the channel. Details of landscaping and planting of margins are currently awaiting the Environment Agency’s final approval.

6.34 The surface water drainage system has been designed to restrict the surface run-off generated by the development to be no greater than the existing discharge. Because ground conditions limit the use of sustainable urban drainage techniques, on-site surface water attenuation would be provided by the use of storm cells within private areas, and oversized surface water drains with hydro brakes in the main roads. All surface water drains to the northern lagoon, which acts as a significant attenuation facility itself, with the southern lagoon acting as a secondary attenuation store if necessary. The northern lagoon discharges at a controlled rate to Redhill Brook via an existing consent granted by the Environment Agency. The surface water drainage system would provide sufficient attenuation to cater for a 1:100 + 20% storm event.

Other Infrastructure Requirements

6.35 Having regard to the size and potential impact of the development upon public services in Merstham and Redhill, additional financial contributions have been sought on key infrastructure requirements. These include contributions towards a bus service through the site, education and health services totalling nearly £1.3 million. Further details are given in paragraph 3.7. These contributions are in addition to the other planning benefits outlined in paragraph 3.7, the most costly of which is the construction of the Holmethorpe Relief Road.

Other Issues

6.36 In terms of its physical relation with neighbouring properties and businesses, the site is relatively well contained. The nearest residential properties are those in Nutfield Road and Orpin Road, which are largely screened from the site by the existing well- established bund and tree belt. Even towards the eastern end of the site, where the bund is at its lowest, existing and proposed buildings would be separated by a minimum of 40 metres. Given these factors, no material harm would be caused by overlooking or overbearing development, nor would construction activities on the site give rise to any unusual risks to public health. There would inevitably be some disturbance and disruption during construction activities, but no more so that might be expected with any large development scheme. Such disturbance can be mitigated to a certain extent through the use of conditions or other means of control.

6.37 Some residents have expressed concern over one of the methods that is proposed to be used to consolidate made ground in the former quarry. Dynamic ground compaction involves dropping a heavy weight on to the ground in a systematic manner. The applicant has provided additional information to the Residents’ Association and demonstrated the technique being used on another site. They have also undertaken to survey those properties nearest to the site before and after such operations. While it is primarily an operational matter for the developer to ensure that ground compaction techniques are carried out in such a way as to not cause damage to neighbouring properties, a condition can be attached requiring agreement over the details and timing of such works.

6.38 A proposal to utilise waste heat being generated from methane gas at the land-fill site to the south is at an early stage of exploration, but it is too early to say with any degree of certainty that such a system would be viable either functionally or financially for this site. Given these doubts, and the differences in time scale for development, it would be unreasonable to link the current development proposal at this stage. However, Structure Plan policy SE2 does promote the use of renewable energy and energy conservation, and it is considered appropriate to impose a condition requiring a minimum of 10% of the energy requirements of the development to be achieved from renewable sources or energy conservation.

CONDITIONS

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including fenestration and roof, of the buildings hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory external appearance is achieved of the development with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policies Ho9 and Ho13.

3. Until the completion of the development hereby permitted, no site or building works (including: excavation, construction of the development hereby permitted, tree works, laying of hard surfaces and landscaping of the site) shall be carried on outside the hours of 0800-1800 Mondays to Fridays inclusive; 0800-1300 hours on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays and Public Holidays. There shall be no deliveries taken at or despatched from the site outside the hours of 0700 – 1900 Mondays to Saturdays inclusive. Note: For the avoidance of doubt "Public Holidays" includes New Year's Day, Good Friday, Easter Monday, May Day, Spring Bank Holiday, August Bank Holiday, Christmas Day and Boxing Day. Reason: To ensure that the construction of the development hereby permitted does not unreasonably affect the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring properties or the occupants of earlier phases of properties on the site that have been occupied, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan policy Ho9.

4. Development shall not be commenced until: (a) Site Investigation: A written desk top study has been carried out that shall include the identification of previous site uses, potential contaminants that might reasonably be expected given those uses and other relevant information; and using this information a diagrammatical representation (Conceptual Model) for the site of all potential contaminant sources, pathways and receptors has been produced. A site investigation has been designed for the site using the information obtained from the desktop study and any diagrammatical representations (Conceptual Model). This shall be submitted in writing to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to that investigation being carried out on the site. The investigation must be comprehensive enough to enable: a human health risk assessment to be undertaken relating to soil, groundwater and surface waters associated on and off the site that may be affected; refinement of the Conceptual Model; and the development of a Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements; (b) Development in accordance with the Method Statement: A written Method Statement detailing any remediation requirements, including measures to minimise the impact on ground and surface waters and post remediation monitoring, using the information obtained from the Site Investigation has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. This shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to that remediation being carried out on the site. The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement, and any addenda submitted by the developer and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any post remediation monitoring identified in the Method statement and agreed by the Local Planning Authority, shall be installed by the developer within the timescales identified in the Method Statement and maintained an operated for as long as identified by the Method Statement; (c) Unsuspected Contamination: If during development, contamination not previously identified, is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, a written addendum to the Method Statement. This addendum to the Method Statement must detail how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with; (d) Post Remediation Monitoring: Upon completion of the remediation detailed in the Method Statement a report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority that provides verification that the required works regarding contamination have been carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement and any addenda thereto. Post remediation sampling and monitoring results shall be included in the report to demonstrate that the required remediation has been fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed in the report. Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority has detailed knowledge of contaminants on the site and that measures to remove, contain or otherwise render harmless the contaminants are taken as appropriate with regard to the Surrey Structure Plan 1994 policy EN1.

5. Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed arboricultural method statement for protection of trees on the northern bund shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall contain details of pruning or removal of trees, specification and location of protective fencing, and details of construction processes for hard surfaces within protected root areas. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policy Pc4.

6. If any tree shown to be retained in the arboricultural method statement approved in condition 5, is removed, or destroyed, or dies during the period of construction of the development hereby permitted, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policy Pc4.

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification) no enlargement of a dwellinghouse consisting of an extension, or an addition to its roof, within Classes A and B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To control any subsequent enlargements in the interests of the visual and residential amenities of the locality with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policies Ho9 and Ho16. 8. No development shall take place, until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The site covers an area in which it is considered necessary to preserve for future reference any archaeological information before it is destroyed by the development with regard to the Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policy Pc8.

9. No development shall take place until an exclusion zone has been fenced off using paling fence around that part of the site lying within the Site of Nature Conservation Importance as identified in the Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan First Alteration 2000. This fencing shall be retained throughout the implementation of the permission, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No vehicles, plant, equipment, goods, materials or any other articles or parts thereof shall be stored on the area identified and fenced in the above condition relating to nature conservation. Reason: To ensure the protection of the Site of Nature Conservation Importance, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan policy Pc2.

10. No development shall take place until a phasing scheme for the formation and equipping of the recreational land, play areas and recycling sites shown on the approved plans has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority, and once so approved implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that adequate playing space facilities are provided for residents of the development in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Local Plan policy Re6.

11. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until surface water drainage works, including surface water attenuation facilities, have been carried out for that part of the development in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily drained in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Local Plan policy Ut3.

12. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the works to realign and open up Gatton Brook have been carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and improve the character of the watercourse, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Local Plan policies Ut3 and Ut4.

13. No occupation of any of the dwellings hereby permitted shall take place until the junctions with Trowers Way and Nutfield Road have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and the visibility zones included in the design shall not be included in any plot or other sub-division of the site. No occupation in excess of 125 of the dwellings hereby permitted shall take place before the new access road between those junctions has been completed and made available for use. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users. Policy: DN2

14. No part of the development shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans for cars associated with that part of the development to be parked and turned where appropriate and cycles to be securely parked. The parking/turning area shall be retained exclusively for its designated use. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users. Policy: DN2, DN3.

15. No development shall take place until a Method of Construction Statement, to include details of: (a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors; (b) loading and unloading of plant and materials; (c) storage of plant and materials; (d) programme of works (including measures for traffic management) (e) provision of boundary hoarding has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction period. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users. Policy: DN2

16. Before any of the operations which involve the movement of materials in bulk to or from the site are commenced, facilities shall be provided as must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, in order that the operator can make all reasonable efforts to keep the public highway clean and prevent the creation of a dangerous surface on the public highway. The agreed measures shall thereafter be retained and used whenever the said operations are carried out. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users. Policy: DN2

17. No new development shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to provide: (a) Secure cycle parking, safe pedestrian and cycle routes; (b) Facilities for public transport i.e.: bus stops, bus shelters and lay-bys; and (c) Information for staff and visitors regarding public transport, walking and cycling and shall thereafter be permanently maintained. Reason: In recognition of Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 - Transport. Policy: DN5

18. The eastern access to the site from Nutfield Road shall not be used for construction traffic without the prior agreement, in writing, of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users, nor harm neighbouring residential amenities, in accordance with policies DN2 and Ho9.

19. No development shall commence until a scheme for the compaction and/or stabilisation of the ground has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority, and once so approved shall be implemented without variation unless otherwise agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring residential properties, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan policy Ho9.

20. The buildings shall be constructed with their lowest finished floor level set at or above 79.65 AOD. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding, in accordance with Reigate and Banstead Local Plan policies Ut3 and Ut4.

21. Compensatory flood storage works within the recreational land in the south-west part of the site shall be carried out in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before the development commences. Reason: To alleviate the increased risk of flooding that would otherwise be caused by a reduction in flood storage capacity.

22. Vegetated buffer zones as shown on the approved plans shall be provided alongside the banks of the Gatton brook. Domestic gardens or formal landscaping shall not be incorporated into the buffer zone to the watercourse, in order to avoid problems such as fragmentation of the buffer by fencing; the introduction of non-native species into the buffer; and pressure for inappropriate bank retention works. Reason: To maintain the character and ecology of the watercourses and provide undisturbed refuges for wildlife using the river corridor.

23. All water crossings shall be by clear spanning structures (from banktop to banktop) that will not impede the river corridor and allow the migration of both channel and bank species. Reason: This will maintain a continuous buffer strip and provide a corridor for the passage of wildlife and reduce the risk of pollution from run-off.

24. There shall be no storage of materials within eight metres of the Gatton Brook. This shall protected during development with fencing and there shall be no access during development within this area. There shall be no fires, dumping or tracking of machinery within this area. Reason: To reduce the impact of the proposed development on wildlife habitats upstream and downstream, including bankside habitats.

25. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the details to be submitted and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or such later date as may be agreed, in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 1994 policy Ho9.

26. No development shall take place until details been submitted and approved, in writing, showing how the development will achieve at least a 10% reduction in energy requirements through the use of renewable energy sources and/or energy conservation measures within the development hereby permitted; and such renewable energy sources and/or energy conservation measures shall be incorporated in the development as approved. Reason: To ensure the use of renewable energy and/or energy conservation as part of the development, in accordance with Structure Plan policy SE2.

27. Landscape works on land to the west of Trowers Way high railway bridge and south of Trowers Way shall be carried out in accordance with details to be submitted and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or such later date as may be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality and the western entrance to the development site with regard to Reigate and Banstead Borough Local Plan 2005 policy Ho9.

INFORMATIVES

1. The applicant is advised that prior to the initial occupation of any individual dwellinghouse hereby permitted, a 140 litre wheeled bin conforming to British Standard RG723/2 and a 60 litre recycling box shall be provided for the exclusive use of the occupants of that dwelling. Prior to the initial occupation of any communal dwellings or flats, details of wheeled refuse bins conforming to British Standard RG723/2 and storage facilities for the wheeled bins shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved storage facilities shall be constructed and the approved bins installed by the developer prior to the initial occupation of any dwelling hereby permitted. Further details on the specification for wheeled bins and recycling boxes is available from the Council’s Neighbourhood Services Division telephone 01737 276224. Bins and boxes meeting the specification may be purchased from any appropriate source, including the Councils Neighbourhood Services, telephone 01737 276627.

2. Your attention is drawn to the need to comply with the requirements of the Environmental Protection legislation and in this respect you are advised to contact the Council’s Environmental Health Services Unit.

3. You are advised that building materials and machinery shall not be stored on the highway and contractors’ vehicles shall be parked with care so as not to cause an obstruction or block visibility on the highway.

4. Recycling of building materials should be considered to decrease the level of waste in the interests of sustainability. The re-use or recycling of materials is desirable wherever possible and should be seen as part of the development process. For further information regarding the re-use or recycling of building materials the applicant is advised to call the Surrey County Council Contract Centre on 08456 009009. 5. The applicant is advised that all bats found in Britain are fully protected under schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is an offence to kill or injure them when roosting to destroy roosts or to block entrances to roosts. It is recommended that an investigation is carried out by a licensed bat worker prior to any works of demolition or refurbishment. If evidence of the presence of bats is found English Nature must be informed immediately. For information on licensed bat workers the applicant should contact Charlotte Evans, Surrey Bat Group, c/o Surrey Wildlife Trust, School Lane Pirbright, Woking Surrey GU24 0JN 901483 488055)

6. The applicant is advised that certain birds and mammals are protected in law under the Wildlife and Countryside Act and all reasonable precautions must be taken to avoid killing or injuring them and in the cases of birds, damaging or destroying their eggs. The applicant is advised that search procedures should be carried out by a licensed consultant to determine whether there are protected birds or mammals resident on the site or in buildings, and to consult English Nature in the event that existence of such species is confirmed.

7. The applicant is advised that protective fencing should be maintained until the development has been completed or any approved landscaping within the protected root areas is implemented. No burning should take place on site or on land adjoining the site. No trenches, pipe runs or drains should be dug within the approved protective root area of any trees retained on site or on land adjoining the site unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and all such installations should accord with the advice given in National Joint Utilities Group Publication Number 10. Nothing should be attached or fixed to any part of the any tree retained on site or adjacent to the site and that trees should not be used as anchor points.

8. The developer is reminded that it is an offence to damage verge land within the highway. Any damage caused as a result of the development, or by construction activities associated with the development, should be repaired to a standard to be agreed with the Highway Authority. The Highway Authority will seek to recover any expenses incurred in repairing highway surfaces or verges as a result of development activity and prosecute persistent offenders. (Highways Act 1980 Sections 131, 148, 149).

9. Your attention is drawn to the safety benefits of installing sprinkler systems as an integral part of new development. Further information is available at www.firesprinklers.info.

10. The Highway Authority has no objection to the proposed development, subject to the above conditions but, if it is the applicant’s intention to offer any of the road works included in the application for adoption as maintainable highways, permission under the Town and Country Planning Act should not be construed as approval to the highway engineering details necessary for inclusion in an Agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980.

11. The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out works on the highway and/or funding the necessary Traffic Regulation Order. The applicant is advised that a licence must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway.

12. The developer is reminded that it is an offence to allow materials to be carried from the site and deposited on or damage the highway from uncleaned wheels or badly loaded vehicles. The Highway Authority will seek, wherever possible, to recover any expenses incurred in clearing, cleaning or repairing highway surfaces and prosecutes persistent offenders. (Highways Act 1980 Sections 131, 148, 149).

13. The applicant is advised that the Borough Council is the street naming and numbering authority and you are requested to contact the Director of Policy and Environment when construction is about to commence enclosing a site layout plan in order that official street naming and numbering can be allocated as appropriate.

14. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws 1981, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency may be required for any proposed works or structures in, under, over or within 8 metres of the brink of the Gatton Brook. Contact Paul Busing on 01276 454329 for further details.

15. Culverting of a watercourse requires the prior written approval of the Local Authority under the Public Health Act 1936, and the prior written consent of the Environment Agency under the terms of the Land Drainage Act 1991/ Water Resources Act 1991. The Environment Agency seeks to avoid culverting, and its consent for such works will normally be withheld. Contact Paul Busing on 01276 454329 for further details.

16. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, an abstraction license will normally be required from the Environment Agency for the abstraction (removal) of water (even temporarily) from any inland waters (rivers, streams, ditches, lakes, etc.) or underground strata (e.g. from a well, borehole or catchpit). The granting of a license will be dependent on the availability of water resources locally and on the acceptability of any resulting impact on the environment and existing protected rights. Before this Agency can make a decision in principle on the likelihood of an Abstraction Licence being granted, the applicant should submit details of:- (i) The proposed location, source of supply and means of abstraction; (ii) The maximum hourly, daily and annual rates of abstraction; (iii) The use(s) the water will be put to. As part of a formal application, the applicant will also be required to demonstrate that the quantities of water applied for represent a reasonable requirement. If a licence is granted, it will be subject to restrictions, and for certain consumptive uses of water, will prohibit abstraction during drier periods of the years. Contact Steve Barrow on 01276 454460 for further details.

17. The applicant should ensure that no aspect of the proposed operations (particularly dewatering) results in any adverse change in flows or levels in any rivers, streams, ditches, springs, lakes or ponds in the vicinity.

18. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is currently required for any discharge of sewage or trade effluent onto or into ground and for surface runoff into groundwater. Such consent may be withheld. If there is an existing discharge consent the applicant should ensure that any increase in volume is permitted under the present conditions.

19. Design standards for the layout and construction of access roads and junctions, including the provision of visibility zones, shall be in accordance with the requirements of the County Highway Authority.

20. When access is required to be 'completed' before any other operations, the Highway Authority will normally agree that wearing course material and in some cases edge restraint may be deferred until construction of the development is virtually complete, provided all reasonable care is taken to protect public safety. REASON FOR PERMISSION

The development hereby permitted has been assessed against Development Plan polices P28, Em8, Co1, Ho2, Ho3, Ho9, Re6, Ut3, Ut4, Mo4, Mo5, Mo6, Mo7, Mo9, Mo12, Mo13, LO4, LO7, SE2, SE4, DN2 and DN3 and material considerations, including national planning guidance, emerging national guidance, Land at Holmethorpe Development Brief, and third party representations. It has been concluded that the development does conflict with Development Plan policies P28, Em8 and Co1, but that there are very special circumstances that justify making a departure in this case in the public interest.