Send Parish Council

SEND PARISH COUNCIL

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD AT 7.15PM ON 20th JANUARY 2020 IN THE UPPER ROOM, LANCASTER HALL

Present: Cllr G Esteves (Chair), Cllr J Brooker Cllr J Manktelow, Cllr P Oven and Coral Davis (Deputy Clerk)

Public session Seven members of the public and Cllr P Beddoes and Borough Councillor P Sheard were in attendance. Comments were received regarding the following:-  Concerns regarding the proposal for Land adjacent to Pembroke House, 54 Potters Lane o The entrance would be on a very narrow part of the road which would be dangerous o Traffic in Potters Lane travels too fast and it is a dangerous road o Building on green space land o Many residents in Potters Lane do not have private parking and need to park in that area o There is a footpath to the river adjacent to the property and visitors park in this area o Adjacent to the conservation area of the River Wey  Concern about the possibility of flooding on the Send Barns Lane application

1. Apologies for Absence Apologies were received from Cllr A Beames.

2. Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest.

3. Minutes The Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 6th January 2020 were approved and signed by the Chairman.

4. Planning applications responses:

19/P/02149 Land to the rear of 5 Send Barns Lane Outline application for the erection of 28 dwellings with associated landscaping and parking following demolition of 5 Send Barns Lane; creation of a new access off Send Barns Lane (all matters reserved except access) Agreed response: - Objection. Please see below the representation on behalf of Send Parish Council regarding our OBJECTION to Planning Application 19/P/02149 Land to the rear of 5 Send Barns Lane - Outline application for the erection of 28 dwellings with associated landscaping and parking following demolition of 5 Send Barns Lane; creation of a new access off Send Barns Lane (all matters reserved except access

Send Parish Council is very concerned about the volume of applications for multiple dwellings that have been received since the adoption of the Guildford Local Plan in April 2019. The Guildford Borough Council Site Delivery Plan has the 665 houses for the Local Plan allocated sites in Send to be delivered by 2025. This will see the village grow by over one third within only five years with no clear plan from the responsible authorities for the expansion of infrastructure and services, which are already at capacity today. Any additional homes beyond those allocated in the local plan, place additional pressure on that same infrastructure and services.

COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS SPECIFIC TO THIS PLANNING APPLICATION:

Send Parish Council objects very strongly to this application for the following reasons:

1. The land is inset but is outside the settlement boundary of the village. The proposal represents overdevelopment of previously Green Belt land with an incongruous development which is out of keeping with the general pattern of ribbon development in the surrounding area and would fail to integrate well with the existing built 1 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 environment. The proposal would therefore fail to comply with policy D1 of the adopted Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2015-2034, policy G5 of the saved Local Plan 2003 and the relevant policies of the emerging Send Neighbourhood Development Plan (SNDP).

2. The proposal is an unacceptable form of back-land development, which is out of keeping and detrimental to the established pattern development in the area and is out of character with the surrounding area

3. The development would mean the loss of an existing, distinctive, open piece of land which provides visual amenity value for this area of Send. It would also represent the loss of Green Belt corridor for wildlife

4. The site lies within the 400m to 5km zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA).

5. The proposal would remove the privacy and amenity from a number of neighbouring properties in Send Barns Lane, Box & Holly Court, Tice Court and Send Marsh Road. Numbers 6 & 6A Send Barns Lane would be sandwiched between two access roads to developments (19/P/01761 Elmsleigh Farm, Send Barns Lane)

6. The development is very close to the West Clandon stream and is located in Flood Zone 3 and Flood Zone 2 which are defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) as having a high and medium probability of flooding respectively. New houses have already been built very locally in Send Barns Lane and this could exacerbate the problem.

7. Proposal does not provide sufficient parking for the proposed residents and visitors and there is no facility for on street parking on the A247 (SNDP Policy 8)

8. Traffic on the Send Barns Lane is already at capacity with regular long tailbacks. The Transport statement estimates up to 8 vehicle movements in the morning and evening peak from a development of 28 houses with 2 cars per household. This does not sound credible

9. The proposal is very close to the traffic lights where a number of accidents have been recorded

10. Visibility for access from the site would be difficult during school drop off and collections and children walking to school. There is no safe pedestrian crossing outside the school and an increase in the number of vehicles and limited visibility would increase the risk Please note that St Bede’s school is included in the Transport statement whereas it has been closed for a number of years.

GENERAL STATEMENT ON PLANNING APPLICATIONS WITHIN SEND PARISH Note of clarification: references to Send village ordinarily include Send Marsh and Burnt Common as parts of Send village

Following the adoption of the Guildford Borough Local Plan on 25 April 2019, Send parish has seen a spike in the number of planning applications seeking residential development on land within and on the edge of the village. Send village was removed from the Green Belt during the production of the Plan, and much of the land now under pressure was included in that removal.

Recent planning applications in Send 19/P/00721: Send Hill, Send; 9 residential dwellings – reduced to 8. NOTE: This application has been REFUSED by Guildford Borough Council for the following reasons:-

2 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 1. The proposal by reason of the quantum and scale of development and its layout which would be at odds with the distinctive linear/ribbon pattern of development along Send Hill and would result in the loss of an existing, distinctive, open piece of land which provides visual amenity value for this area of Send. The 8 houses would result in an incongruous development which would fail to achieve high quality design that responds to the distinctive local character and landscape character. The proposal would therefore fail to comply with policy D1 of the adopted Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2015-2034, policy G5 of the saved Local Plan 2003 and the relevant policies of the emerging Send Neighbourhood Plan.

2. The site is identified as having Amenity Green Space of medium value within the Council's Assessment of Sites for amenity value 2017 document (site ETH_086). The proposed development would result in the loss of a significant part of the identified parcel of open land and would therefore result in the detrimental loss of the identified visual amenity value of the land contrary to policy ID4 (8) of the Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2015-2034.

3. The site lies within the 400m to 5km zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA). The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that there will be no likely significant effect on the Special Protection Area and, in the absence of an appropriate assessment, is unable to satisfy itself that this proposal, either alone or in combination with other development, would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area and the relevant Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In this respect, significant concerns remain with regard to the adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area in that there is likely to be an increase in dog walking, general recreational use, damage to the habitat and disturbance to the protected species within the protected areas. As such the development is contrary to the objectives of policies NE1 and NE4 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan 2003 (as saved by CLG Direction on 24/09/07) and conflicts with saved policy NRM6 of the South East Plan 2009. For the same reasons the development would fail to meet the requirements of Regulation 63 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Local Planning Authority must refuse to grant planning

19/P/01003: Land to North of Heath Drive; 29 residential dwellings (Outline);

19/P/01048: 22A Send Barns Lane; 16 residential dwellings (Outline) – reduced to 10

19/P/01112: Oldlands, Burnt Common Lane, Ripley; 32 residential dwellings (at the western edge the Garlick’s Arch allocation). Withdrawn 19/P/00918: 90 Potters Lane; 5 residential dwellings; NOTE: This application has been REFUSED by Guildford Borough Council for the following reasons (summarised): 1. It ‘represents an incongruous development which is out of keeping with the general pattern of development in the surrounding area, which would fail to integrate well with the existing built environment and would fail to protect or improve the special character and setting of the corridor of the River Wey.’ (Contrary to policy G5 (2,3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9) and G11 of the saved local plan 2003, policy D1 of the Local Plan 2019 and paragraph 127 and 130 of the NPPF). 2. It would ‘result in an unacceptable level of harm to the occupants ‘of neighbouring properties ‘in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy to their rear gardens’. (contrary to policy G1 (3) of the Guildford Borough Local Plan 2003 (as saved by CLG Direction on 24/09/2007), paragraph 5.24 of the Residential Design Guide SPG 2004, policy D1 of the Local Plan 2019 and the NPPF, paragraphs 127 and 130). 3. There are ‘conditions prejudicial to highway safety’. (Contrary to the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), the Surrey Local Transport Plan, and the Guildford Local Plan (2019) policy ID3). 4. ‘The site lies within the 400m to 5km zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA). The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that there will be no likely significant effect on the Special Protection Area and is unable to satisfy itself that this proposal, either alone or in combination with other development, would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area and the relevant Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). (Contrary to the objectives of policies NE1 and NE4 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan 3 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 2003 (as saved by CLG Direction on 24/09/07) and conflicts with saved policy NRM6 of the South East Plan 2009). 5. The ‘development would fail to meet the requirements of Regulation 61 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended’, and ‘ requirements of Regulation 62’ 19/P/01249 Send Barns Stables, Woodhill – 8 dwellings. REFUSED 19/P/01686 Land to the rear of Pine Cottage – 4 dwellings. NOTE: This application has been REFUSED by Guildford Borough Council for the following reasons:- 1. The proposed development would, by virtue of its design, location and positioning, including the access road, extent of the hardstanding, plot sizes and limited landscaping, result in an undesirable and unacceptable form of backland development, which is out of keeping and detrimental to the established pattern of linear development in the area. As such the development is out of character with and would result in significant demonstrable harm to the prevailing character of the surrounding area. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to policies H1 and D1 of the LPSS, 2015-2034, policy G5 of the saved Local Plan, 2003, the National Design Guide, 2019, the Residential Design Guide, 2004 and the requirements of the NPPF, 2019.

2. The proposal would, by virtue of the positioning and proximity of the access road combined with the intensity of use, result in an arrangement which is detrimental to the peace and quiet of the neighbouring property Green Horizons. Further, as a result of the proposed positioning of the dwellings, in particular, Plots 1 and 2, combined with the proposed removal of boundary vegetation between the application site and this neighbouring property, would result in a harmful loss of privacy. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to policy G1(3) of the saved Local Plan, 2003 and the requirements of the NPPF, 2019.

3. The proposal fails to provide sufficient arboricultural information to either justify removal of the proposed trees or demonstrate that the proposal would not cause damage to the neighbouring trees, therefore, the proposal is contrary to policy NE5 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan, 2003 (as saved by CLG Direction on 24/09/2007).

4. The site lies within the 400m to 5km zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA). The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that there will be no likely significant effect on the Special Protection Area and, in the absence of an appropriate assessment, is unable to satisfy itself that this proposal, either alone or in combination with other development, would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area and the relevant Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In this respect, significant concerns remain with regard to the adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area in that there is likely to be an increase in dog walking, general recreational use, damage to the habitat and disturbance to the protected species within the protected areas. As such the development is contrary to the objectives of policies P5 and ID4 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan: Strategy and Sites, 2015-2034, NE4 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan 2003 (as saved by CLG Direction on 24/09/07) and conflicts with saved policy NRM6 of the South East Plan 2009. For the same reasons the development would fail to meet the requirements of Regulation 61 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended, and as the development does not meet the requirements of Regulation 62 the Local Planning Authority must refuse to grant planning permission.

19/P/01761 Elmsleigh Farm, Send Barns Lane – 8 dwellings

19/P/02237 Land adjacent to Pembroke House, 54 Potters Lane – 10 dwellings

In addition, 19/P/00027 at Clockbarn Nursery proposed 75 dwellings, 15 more than the 60 allocated in the Local Plan and some proposals, such as 19/P/00328 at Send Hill have proposed a more intensive use of smaller sites.

Only two of the recent applications have been on land allocated for housing in the Local Plan, meaning a total of 132 additional dwellings proposed in the parish in the first nine months of the plan period alone.

The purpose of the General Statement 4 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 The purpose of this general statement is to set out common strategic concerns that Send Parish Council has in respect of all housing development in Send village.

Windfall sites and housing numbers

Part of the function of the planning system is to identify suitable land in appropriate, sustainable locations to meet the growing needs of a place over a defined period. In Send parish, the Guildford Local Plan identifies an area of land at Garlick’s Arch for 550 homes, and further sites at Clockbarn Nursery (60) and Send Hill (40). These were tested at the Inquiry and, balancing their impact upon transport and other services in the parish, were found to be within the limits of what is acceptable (despite local objection). The Inspector allowed these allocations within the Green Belt partly justified by the exceptional circumstances of housing need.

The search for available land within the borough was difficult, with various options being presented through the plan- making process. More was asked of Garlick’s Arch – its proposed capacity rose from 400 homes to 550 homes (this number has been further increased to 600 homes by the developers in their current scoping opinion application 19/S/00002) precisely because of the lack of available sites. However, some are now emerging as windfalls (unidentified sites that may come forward over the plan period).

The Inquiry examined the spatial distribution of housing allocations across the borough and found it sound, but the Inspector was cautious in making allocations in villages that would risk eroding their character and undermining the ability to provide social facilities and sustainable transport that the larger sites could deliver (para 96 in his report). The present reality in Send village is that the windfall sites add a further capacity to the three allocated sites, which risks delivering the type of consequences the Inspector was keen to avoid. Housing need is established through the Local Plan; no further need has come to light (indeed, proposed allocations added at the Modifications stage were ultimately removed). Send village is at the bottom of the spatial hierarchy in the borough, and not a suitable place to concentrate significant new development. Send parish also carries the highest expectation for housing delivery outside of the built-up areas, and significant windfalls threaten to tip the balance towards a distribution that could become damaging.

Windfall sites were expected to contribute only 30 dwellings each year across the borough, yet 132 are already proposed in Send parish alone. Some of this land may be coming forward because of the extent of the removal of land from the Green Belt around the village and in its immediate surroundings. Whilst the Parish Council can prepare for the expected applications on allocated sites, it is concerned that a high number of windfall sites will add to the pressure upon services and the transport issues faced in the village in an unco-ordinated and reactive way.

The Parish Council asks that the impact of windfall sites, over and above that of allocated sites, is comprehensively managed by the Borough Council, understanding and mitigating the additional pressures that are likely to occur. Whilst proposals for development are not completions, the Parish Council does ask that the Council monitors housing completions against the requirements of the Local Plan and adjusts its strategy where necessary to protect the character of smaller settlements and avoid an over-provision of housing stock in one place (e.g. through phasing, or reducing the capacity, of very large sites).

Impacts on Send village

There are a number of potential impacts upon Send village that the Parish Council wish to raise in respect of windfall development proposed within the village and outside of the Green Belt coverage (assuming that proposals in the Green Belt would be resisted). The following matters would be expected to be covered by applicants and developers in the application material (including Design and Access Statement and Planning Statements) and commitments secured through condition(s) and or section 106 obligations (or CIL, once it’s adopted).

(a) Transport and Movement

5 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 The Parish Council has worked with Surrey Police, Surrey County Council Highways and the local school and medical centre on Send Barns Lane to address the highway problems in the village (speeding, volume, parking, pedestrian / cyclist safety). The A247 is presently a very busy road. The two larger speculative applications in the village – Heath Road and Send Barns Lane – are both directly dependent on access to the A247, the latter adjacent to the school with clear impacts upon the journey to school for parents and children.

Whilst the Inquiry was content with the proposed allocations in Send village from a traffic perspective, further windfall development reliant on the A247 is not improving this situation and will raise resident perceptions that this situation is either worsening or going unaddressed (particularly so in the absence of the slip roads associated with the Garlick’s Arch allocation). Send Parish Council is unclear on the cumulative traffic implications of windfall development being proposed and would want to see this assessed and mitigated through highway improvements and suitable alternatives to car travel (such as safer routes to school for cyclists and pedestrians and improved bus services).

The Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal raised this directly; it recommended that clarification be made regarding the risk of severe traffic congestion in Send village (para 10.4.6). Work must be undertaken to determine the additional cumulative highway impacts of all the development in the parish (on all roads infrastructure), having regard to the overuse of the existing road infrastructure.

Infrastructure work is planned on the A247 and set out in the Local Plan at LRN18, though the timing of these is not clear from the plan. Additionally, the policy allocations at both Burnt Common and Garlick’s Arch both require crossings and routes to be enhanced to ensure that these outlying allocations link effectively to the village centre and the key facilities provided along Send Road and Send Barns Lane, encouraging modal shift (including to public transport) and reduced use of private cars. It would be prudent that windfall developments resulting in additional pressures on both the roads, and places at the GP and school, contribute proportionally to necessary improvements in capacity and service. The Parish Council will be looking to the provisions of Policy ID3 to fulfil this, particularly criteria (1), (2) and (6).

(b) Social Infrastructure

Send Parish Council maintains concerns expressed through the plan-making process that services within Send village are already stretched and will continue to be so with the windfall development coming forward to date, particularly from those emerging in the early part of the plan period.

During the Inquiry, Ripley School was closed, and the school in Send village now has a wider catchment which accommodates the displacement resulting from the closure. The GP capacity (which also serves Clandon, Ripley and Send parish) also has a greater expectation placed upon it from additional houses and families coming into the village.

(c) Character

Send Parish Council is conscious of the impact of significant development in the coming decade on the character of the different parts of the village. Send is largely linear, development lining the main routes with a focus of services around the Tannery Lane junction, and the school and GP further south on Send Barns Lane. Send Marsh and Burnt Common are less linear and set out on suburban type residential roads, but have no particular focus beyond the historic core at the elbow of Send Marsh Lane and the junction of Send Barns Lane with Portsmouth Road.

The allocations have been considered in the context of their position in Send village, and the landscape, and have guidance in policy allocations advising on particular design aspects that need to be taken into account in bringing these sites forward. The windfall sites have no such guidance and are dependent on the careful assessment of the design implications at the application stage, subject to the Place-making and Design policies of the adopted plan. The Parish Council would expect particular care to be taken to windfall developments, and the way proposals respond to

6 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 Policy D1, particularly criteria (1), (4), (6) and (17). The Parish Council are particularly keen to see the principles within Building for Life 12 applied to larger windfall sites, to ensure that development is helping to sustain and nourish the parish and not solely to meet housing needs.

Fundamentally, current proposals at Send Barns Lane and Potters Lane are back-land developments and the application at Send Hill also introduces development behind the line of the road frontage, all of which could be construed as introducing new forms of development without considering the wider context of existing development.

(d) Housing Need

Within Send parish, there is a continuing need for a mix of housing types, particularly affordable housing, to allow people to stay within the village. The Local Plan also prioritises the role of Send Business Centre as an employment location (despite its poor transport connections and infrastructure) and the Parish Council is also keen to ensure that employees can live and work in the village to help improve the local movement network without a continued reliance on private vehicles.

The Local Plan has provision to ensure that a housing mix is delivered on all housing sites through Policy H1, and the Parish Council will be looking to ensure that allocations and windfall sites do meet the needs of the village in meeting our wider aims for the parish.

Other policy matters

Alongside these considerations, Send Parish Council will look to ensure that the relevant policies of the Local Plan area applied rigorously to applications to ensure that the village is developed in a manner than maintains its role and character and develops services and infrastructure in a sustainable way.

19/P/02237 Land adjacent to Pembroke House, 54 Potters Lane Erection of 10 houses (5 detached and 5 attached, all 3 bedroom) with associated landscaping, parking and vehicular access Agreed response: - Objection. The final response will be agreed at the Council Meeting on 17th February but the following points were considered in the response:-  Since the Local Plan was adopted in April 2019 applications for 229 houses have been submitted with only 75 houses detailed in the plan. A total of 665 houses are planned for Send and there is no infrastructure to support the planned houses let alone additional ones. At a meeting in May 2018 GBC Councillors promised that the infrastructure would be in place prior to the houses being built but this has not been delivered.  Overdevelopment of the plot  Backland development and the loss of a green space in the village  Proposal is at a narrow part of the road where traffic speed is already an issue  Adjacent to National Trust land, the River Wey navigation corridor, and the development would be visible and would spoil the rural environment  Parking is a big issue in the road and the area outside this property is used by residents with no private parking and leisure users for the river  Only two visitor spaces proposed and limited turning areas for delivery vehicles

19/P/02240 Land at Tithebarns Farm, Tithebarns Lane Change of use of the site to 16 hectacres of publicly accessible open space with associated landscaping, access, parking and other works to facilitate a bespoke Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) Agreed response: - Objection. The Parish Council welcomes the use of the area as a site that will not be built on in the future. However, there is grave concern about the access to the site from the proposed development at Garlick’s Arch. There is no public transport to the site and residents would have to cross the A3 and the slip road to the A3 and despite the proposals for footpaths/cycle path it is a difficult place to access without a car.

7 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20 19/P/02245 2 Tannery House, Tannery Lane Change of use for a temporary period of two years from Use Class B8 (storage) to Use Class A2 (Assembly & Leisure) for use as a Gymnasium (including jiu-jitsu) Agreed response: - No comment

20/P/00017 5 Birnam Close Erection of first floor front extension, front porch canopy, changes to fenestration, alterations to roof and removal of chimney stack Agreed response: - No comment

20/P/00032 Ruskin Cottage, 55 Send Barns Lane Demolition of existing conservatory and replace with single storey extension. Roof conversion to habitable accommodation including a hip to gable roof extension and rear dormer Agreed response: - Objection. The Parish Council acknowledges that there has been development on other properties in the vicinity but feels that this proposal would adversely affect the street scene. The proposal is very high and bulky and would stand out from the neighbouring property

5. The Councillors considered the application to Woking Borough Council (PLAN/2019/1176) for the redevelopment of the football stadium and building of 1,048 dwellings and the potential effect of construction traffic travelling through Send. It was agreed to submit a comment relating to the effect on the roads of the construction vehicles that would travel through the village.

6. Other applications received after the agenda had been prepared There were no other applications

7. To receive an update of previous applications:- 19/P/00721 Land off Send Hill – erection of 8 no residential dwellings with associated vehicular access REFUSED 19/P/02008 Evergreen, 6 Kevan Drive – single storey rear extension following demolition of conservatory APPROVED 19/P/02037 Ford Cottage, Potters Lane – change of use from home office outbuilding to an annexe APPROVED

8. Date of the next Planning Committee The next Planning Committee meeting will be on Monday 3rd February 2020 at 7.15pm

The meeting closed at 7.47pm

Send Parish Office 28 Send Road Send Woking Surrey GU23 7ET 01483 479312 [email protected]

8 SPC Planning Committee 20.01.20