SANG) on Land at Heather Farm

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) on land at Heather Farm

Summary

To seek agreement to the adoption of land at Heather Farm near Chobham for use as Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) by Woking Borough and Surrey Heath Borough Councils. To seek agreement to carry out a 5 week targeted consultation on the Strategic Environmental Assessment for the proposal.

Portfolio Built Environment – signed off 1st September 2011 Wards Affected All

RECOMMENDATION

The Executive is advised to RESOLVE that

(i) the proposal for the management of land at Heather Farm as a SANG be agreed;

(ii) the Strategic Environmental Assessment be published for consultation;

(iii) subject to (a) and (b) below, the Head of Corporate Governance, in consultation with the Finance and Built Environment Portfolio Holders, be authorised to enter into an Agreement with Woking Borough Council and Horsell Common Preservation Society for the use of land at Heather Farm as a SANG by Woking and Surrey Heath Borough Councils:

(a) that no significant changes are required to the SEA arising from the consultation, and (b) that the Head of Corporate Governance is satisfied that the land will be retained as public open space in perpetuity.

1. Resource Implications

1.1 There are no resource implications arising from this work beyond that budgeted for in 2011/12.

1.2 The management of the site as a SANG will be entirely funded through developer contributions at no cost to the Council, as set out in the SANG proposal document. Horsell Common Preservation Society, as the landowners and managers, will act as the fund administrators. Surrey Heath Borough Council and Woking Borough Council will pay all developer contributions collected towards this site to Horsell Common Preservation Society, in arrears, on a quarterly basis. Horsell Common Preservation Society will be required to spend the money on improvements to and maintenance of the site, as set out in the SANG proposal document, and to provide a progress report twice yearly to Surrey Heath and Woking Borough Councils.

1.3 The appropriate level of developer contributions has been set at £1,700 per additional person arising from new development. Surrey Heath’s finance team have been involved in producing a tariff calculator based on the expected costs of bringing the site up to SANG standard and maintaining it

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

as such. Woking Borough Council and Horsell Common Preservation Society have also been consulted and have agreed the calculations. The S151 officer has been consulted and is satisfied with the tariff calculations.

1.4 Tables 1 and 2 of Annex 1 set out in full the individual capital asset and maintenance costs associated with the management of this site as a SANG. The tariff calculations take account of these costs – assumptions have been made regarding the rate at which contributions will be collected from developers, and the figures have been adjusted for anticipated inflation and interest rates. It is expected that Surrey Heath Borough Council will collect contributions for approximately 30 dwellings per year towards the SANG at Heather Farm. Table 3 of Annex 1 sets out the details of the calculations and shows that the fund will be sufficient to maintain the SANG for 80 years. This is in accordance with general practice for calculating SANG tariffs.

1.5 In summary, Table 3 of Annex 1 shows the following balance of income and expenditure over the 80 year period.

Item Income Expenditure Total Developer £4,919,000 Contributions to be Collected Income from Interest over £32,898,000 80 year period Setup, including land £1,321,000 value, and replacement of capital assets (including inflation) Major Refurbishments £12,452,000 (including inflation) Ongoing Maintenance £24,044,000 (including inflation) Total £37,817,000 £37,817,000

2. Key Issues

2.1 The Council has recently adopted a SANG at Hawley Meadows and Blackwater Park which will allow a certain amount of development to come forward. In particular, this site will address large sites in the west of the Borough, and will allow regeneration of Camberley Town Centre in line with the 2020 strategy and the emerging Core Strategy.

2.2 However, there is still a need for additional SANG in the Borough, if the Council’s housing targets in the emerging Core Strategy are to be met. The proposed SANG at Heather Farm would allow avoidance of impact for small sites of fewer than 9 units across the borough, and also for larger sites within 5km of the site.

2.3 Land at Heather Farm is owned and will be managed by Horsell Common Preservation Society (HCPS). HCPS have been a registered charity since 1959, and are major landowners in Woking Borough, owning and managing over 830 acres of land. The Society has a policy of active management to preserve a balanced woodland and heathland ecology and at the same time provide access to the public for open-air recreation and enjoyment.

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

2.4 The SANG capacity will be shared with Woking Borough Council and the site has the ability to provide mitigation for some 467 units in Surrey Heath.

2.5 The details of the Tariff payment are set out below. In accordance with legal advice the payments have been differentiated to reflect the size of properties and thus are proportional to the cost of the mitigation being provided.

Dwelling Occupancy Tariff @ £1700 per person 1 bedroom 1.4 £2,380 2 bedroom 1.85 £3,145 3 bedroom 2.5 £4,250 4 bedroom 2.85 £4,845 5+ bedroom 3.7 £6,290

2.6 Although not required by UK legislation, nonetheless a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been undertaken for the project. Authority is now sought to carry out a targeted consultation on the SEA document for a period of 5 weeks, as required by the SEA Regulations. The Council will consult the three statutory consultation bodies (Natural England, the Environment Agency and English Heritage) as well as any other organisations or individuals as appropriate.

2.7 An agreement between Horsell Common Preservation Society, Woking Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Council has been prepared and sets out the joint approach to the project in respect of allocation of SANGS capacity and payment of contributions. It is proposed that, where possible, the obligations contained in the Agreement will be protected to ensure that the land will continue to be maintained as public open space even in the unlikely event that Horsell Common Preservation Society should cease to exist.

3. Options

3.1 The options are

i) To agree to management of land as SANGs and publication of the SEA ii) To not agree to management of land as SANGs and publication of the SEA

4. Proposals

4.1 It is proposed that land at Heather Farm owned by Horsell Common Preservation Society be managed as a SANG. This would enable housing to be provided on sites of 9 or fewer units across the Borough and on sites of 10 or more units within 5km of the SANG site, as shown on page 7 of the proposal document. The overall capacity of the SANG will be split between Woking Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Council in a proportion which corresponds to the overall proportion of the site falling within each authority’s administrative area. In Surrey Heath, the SANG will provide mitigation for 1,122 additional persons, which equates to approximately 467 units, at an average occupancy rate of 2.4 persons/dwelling. In the event that Woking decide not to utilise all of their capacity then it is possible to seek agreement for that to be allocated to Surrey Heath.

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

5. Supporting Information

5.1 A fully costed SANG proposal has been drawn up by Surrey Heath, Woking and Horsell Common Preservation Society. The scheme has identified costs over 80 years as the basis for accumulating a capital sum from which income could be derived to then cover ongoing management and maintenance costs. From this a tariff has been identified. The calculations are set out in Annex 1.

5.2 Following legal advice it is now considered that the tariff should be collected on a per person rather than a per dwelling basis. Using advice on occupancy rates an approach to calculating SANGS has been agreed between the authorities. This approach is consistent with the approach being advocated by Natural England. This approach is set out in the table below.

Dwelling Size Occupancy 1 bedroom 1.40 2 bedroom 1.85 3 bedroom 2.50 4 bedroom 2.85 5+ bedroom 3.70

5.3 A management plan for the site has been written in consultation with Surrey Wildlife Trust, Natural England and Horsell Common Preservation Society.

6. Corporate Objectives And Key Priorities

6.1 Supports Objective 1 of making Surrey Heath an even better place where people are happy to live through the protection, management, maintenance and enhancement of public green spaces and supports sustainable living, construction and development. This also supports Objective 3 in relation to building and encouraging communities where people can live happily and healthily as the SANG will underpin the delivery of new housing in the Borough.

7. Policy Framework

7.1 Protection of the SPA is embodied in European and national guidance as set out in the European Habitats and Birds Directives , the UK Habitat Regulations and Planning Policy Statement 9:Biodiversity and Geological Conservation ( August 2005). Under this legislation the Local Planning Authority is the competent authority in respect of ensuring that no likely significant effect to the SPA arises from development proposals. This is addressed by the Joint Delivery Framework for the Thames Basin Heaths SPA as the jointly agreed mechanism by which the Thames Basin Heaths local authorities will ensure that no likely significant effect to the SPA arises from development proposals. This proposed SANGS meets the requirements of the Joint Delivery Framework.

8. Legal Issues

8.1 This project further supports the Councils work to meet its obligations under the Habitats Regulations to ensure that new residential development has no

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

likely significant adverse effect upon the SPA. This also further supports this Councils recognition of its duty of care in respect of biodiversity as set out in the Natural England and Rural Communities Act 2006.

8.2 In addition recent legal advice suggests that a proportionate approach should be taken to SANGS contributions rather than the current flat rate approach. Accordingly a scheme for applying a differentiated tariff has been drawn up. This accords with the emerging approach being advocated by Natural England for the Strategic Access Management and Maintenance Tariff, which this Council currently collects.

8.3 Whilst not required by UK legislation, an SEA could be construed as being required by European legislation and so for the avoidance of doubt one has been prepared. In order to comply with the European and UK legislation, a 5 week consultation on the prepared SEA is necessary. Failure to consult on this document could result in the Council being open to legal challenge.

8.4 It is proposed that, where possible, the obligations contained in the Agreement between Horsell Common Preservation Society and Surrey Heath and Woking Borough Councils will be protected to ensure that the land will continue to be maintained as public open space even in the unlikely event that Horsell Common Preservation Society should cease to exist. The final wording of the Agreement is currently under consideration by Legal Services in order to ensure this protection. If it is not possible to secure the use of the land in this way there is a risk that, if Horsell Common Preservation Society were to cease to exist or sell on the land on, this use would not be protected. In the light of the large SANGS contribution likely to be made for the provision of this SANG, Members may not wish to proceed without this assurance. For this reason, a condition has been built into recommendation (iii) of this item that any Agreement relating to the use of this site as a SANG should not be entered into until this issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of the Head of Governance in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Finance and Built Environment.

9. Sustainability

9.1 The proposed SANGS is part of a wider project which will deliver enhanced or additional greenspace within the Borough and surrounding authorities. This SANGS should attract some existing users of the SPA thus reducing existing travel and car usage. The project therefore addresses issues that support a sustainable approach to development.

10. Risk Management

10.1 The Heather Farm SANGS is a joint project between Horsell Common Preservation Society, Woking Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Council. The SANG proposal document represents the agreed way forward in respect of addressing the implications of new development across the Boroughs of Surrey Heath and Woking.

10.2 The key risks to the project arise from current uncertainties in the housing market which affect the funding stream from developer contributions and thus the ability to deliver the works needed to support the SANGS. Works will be phased to match the income stream thus no financial shortfall requiring funding by the authorities involved should arise.

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

11. Consultation

11.1 Consultation on the SEA will ensure that this document meets the requirements of the SEA Directive and is therefore less likely to be open to legal challenge.

11.2 The SANG scheme is part of a wider planning proposal which will be submitted by Horsell Common Preservation Society to Woking Borough Council. Horsell Common Preservation Society has already undertaken early consultation with the communities local to the site and a more formal consultation will take place when the planning application is submitted.

11.3 Natural England have been consulted and indicated that they are satisfied the proposal accords with their guidelines for SANGS.

12. Officer Comments

12.1 The Heather Farm site was included in the Surrey Waste Plan 2008. The proposal to use the site as a SANG represents an alternative use of the site which is considered to be more favourable for local residents and the local environment. Use of the site as a SANG rather than a waste site removes the risk of Heavy Goods Vehicles travelling to and from the site passing through Chobham. In addition, this proposal will enhance the local open space provision. It will include a dedicated parking area for users of the site and so will not impact upon existing car parking provision in the surrounding area.

12.2 This item will be considered the LDF Working Group on 15 September 2011.

Annexes 1.SANG Proposal Document Background Papers 1.Draft Strategic Environmental Assessment 2. Draft Legal Agreement 3. Heather Farm Management Plan Author/Contact Details Jess Taylor x 7215 Head of Service Brian Townley

Consultations, Implications and Issues Addressed Resources Required Consulted Revenue  05.08.11 Capital - - Human Resources - - Asset Management - - IT Other Issues Required Consulted Corporate Objectives & Key Priorities  05.08.11 Policy Framework   Legal  05.08.11 Governance - - Sustainability   Risk Management   Equalities Impact Assessment - - Community Safety - - Human Rights - - Consultation   P R & Marketing - - Development Control Team  05.08.11

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Annex 1

Table 1: Work Programme Costs – costs shown at 2010 prices – inflation is applied during tariff calculations

Year Planning, setup and major refurbishment Unit Cost (£) Quantity Total Replacement costs Cost (£) Period (years) 1 Land Value 515,020 1 515,020 n/a 1 Site Survey 2,229 1 2,229 n/a 1 Design of path and landscaping scheme 5,000 1 5,000 n/a 1 Car Park 31,000 1 31,000 n/a 1 Layout of new unsurfaced walking routes 10 (per linear metre) 3,000 30,000 n/a 1 Topsoil and seeding of Heather Farm 96,923 1 96,923 n/a Landscapes area 1 Foundations for footbridge from Heather Farm 4,800 1 4,800 n/a 1 New footbridge from Heather Farm 13,840 1 13,840 20 1 Fencing to SPA Boundary 5,640 1 5,640 10 3 Recycled Plastic Boardwalk to wettest areas 300 (per linear metre) 500 150,000 20 5 New foundations for Bourne Field Footbridge 4,800 1 4,800 n/a 5 Replacement footbridge at Bourne Field 13,840 1 13,840 20 5 Waymarking of routes 50 6 300 5 5 Litter/Dog Waste Bins 600 4 2,400 5 5 Improvements to entrances, including off-site 1,000 1 1,000 5 signage 5 Site Leaflet 3,000 1 3,000 5 10 Replacement Fencing for Dog and Cattle 10 (per linear metre) 2,210 22,100 10 Control 10 New signage and Interpretation Panels 1,500 (per panel) 3 4,500 10 10 Replacement Gates 500 3 1,500 10

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Table 2: Maintenance Costs – costs shown at 2010 prices – inflation is applied during tariff calculations

Maintenance Costs Unit Cost (£) Quantity Programme Annual Costs Bridge Inspection and Maintenance 1,000 2 Every 2 1,000 years Path Maintenance 2 (per linear metre) 3,000 Annual 6,000 Litter/dog waste bins servicing 500 4 Annual 2,000 Visitor Survey 3,000 1 Every 5 600 years Biodiversity monitoring 3,000 1 Every 3 1,000 years Wardening salary & on costs ½ ranger 40,000 0.5 Annual 20,000 Ranger transport costs (vehicle & fuel) 8,000 0.5 Annual 4,000 Car Park and Access Road Maintenance 1,250 1 Annual 1,250

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Table 3: Heather Farm SANG tariff calculator working sheet

Start up Major Major Major RECEIPTS Interest (based and other Annual Refurbishments Refurbishments Refurbishments Expenditure BASED ON on mid year Brought Carried costs Maintenance 1 2 3 Total £1,700 Tariff balance) Forward forward YEAR £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 1 704,000 704,000 7,000 711,000 2 38,000 38,000 -680,000 8,000 711,000 77,000 3 167,000 39,000 206,000 -680,000 -4,000 77,000 -400,000 4 40,000 40,000 -680,000 -18,000 -400,000 -1,058,000 5 22,000 41,000 11,000 74,000 -680,000 -34,000 -1,058,000 -1,698,000 6 43,000 43,000 -680,000 -81,000 -1,698,000 -2,416,000 7 44,000 44,000 -680,000 -109,000 -2,416,000 -3,162,000 8 46,000 46,000 -680,000 -139,000 -3,162,000 -3,935,000 9 47,000 47,000 -158,000 -160,000 -3,935,000 -4,206,000 10 49,000 14,000 47,000 109,000 -166,000 -4,206,000 -4,262,000 11 51,000 51,000 -212,000 -4,262,000 -4,423,000 12 54,000 54,000 -220,000 -4,423,000 -4,589,000 13 56,000 56,000 -228,000 -4,589,000 -4,761,000 14 58,000 58,000 -237,000 -4,761,000 -4,939,000 15 61,000 17,000 78,000 -245,000 -4,939,000 -5,107,000 16 64,000 64,000 -254,000 -5,107,000 -5,297,000 17 67,000 67,000 -263,000 -5,297,000 -5,493,000 18 70,000 70,000 -273,000 -5,493,000 -5,696,000 19 73,000 73,000 -283,000 -5,696,000 -5,906,000 20 76,000 21,000 73,000 354,000 524,000 -282,000 -5,906,000 -5,665,000 21 80,000 80,000 -281,000 -5,665,000 -5,867,000 22 83,000 83,000 -291,000 -5,867,000 -6,075,000 23 87,000 87,000 -302,000 -6,075,000 -6,290,000

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Start up Major Major Major RECEIPTS Interest (based and other Annual Refurbishments Refurbishments Refurbishments Expenditure BASED ON on mid year Brought Carried costs Maintenance 1 2 3 Total £1,700 Tariff balance) Forward forward YEAR £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 24 91,000 91,000 -312,000 -6,290,000 -6,511,000 25 46,000 95,000 26,000 167,000 -321,000 -6,511,000 -6,665,000 26 99,000 99,000 -331,000 -6,665,000 -6,897,000 27 104,000 104,000 -342,000 -6,897,000 -7,136,000 28 108,000 108,000 -354,000 -7,136,000 -7,381,000 29 113,000 113,000 -366,000 -7,381,000 -7,635,000 30 118,000 33,000 113,000 264,000 -375,000 -7,635,000 -7,746,000 31 124,000 124,000 -384,000 -7,746,000 -8,007,000 32 129,000 129,000 -397,000 -8,007,000 -8,275,000 33 135,000 135,000 -410,000 -8,275,000 -8,550,000 34 141,000 141,000 -424,000 -8,550,000 -8,833,000 35 147,000 41,000 188,000 -437,000 -8,833,000 -9,082,000 36 154,000 154,000 -450,000 -9,082,000 -9,379,000 37 161,000 161,000 -465,000 -9,379,000 -9,683,000 38 168,000 168,000 -480,000 -9,683,000 -9,995,000 39 176,000 176,000 -495,000 -9,995,000 -10,314,000 40 184,000 51,000 176,000 853,000 1,263,000 -484,000 -10,314,000 -9,536,000 41 192,000 192,000 -472,000 -9,536,000 -9,816,000 42 200,000 200,000 -486,000 -9,816,000 -10,101,000 43 209,000 209,000 -500,000 -10,101,000 -10,392,000 44 219,000 219,000 -514,000 -10,392,000 -10,687,000 45 112,000 229,000 63,000 404,000 -524,000 -10,687,000 -10,808,000 46 239,000 239,000 -534,000 -10,808,000 -11,103,000 47 250,000 250,000 -549,000 -11,103,000 -11,402,000 48 261,000 261,000 -564,000 -11,402,000 -11,705,000 49 273,000 273,000 -578,000 -11,705,000 -12,010,000

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9

Start up Major Major Major RECEIPTS Interest (based and other Annual Refurbishments Refurbishments Refurbishments Expenditure BASED ON on mid year Brought Carried costs Maintenance 1 2 3 Total £1,700 Tariff balance) Forward forward YEAR £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 50 285,000 78,000 273,000 636,000 -585,000 -12,010,000 -11,959,000 51 298,000 298,000 -590,000 -11,959,000 -12,251,000 52 311,000 311,000 -605,000 -12,251,000 -12,545,000 53 325,000 325,000 -619,000 -12,545,000 -12,839,000 54 340,000 340,000 -633,000 -12,839,000 -13,132,000 55 355,000 98,000 453,000 -645,000 -13,132,000 -13,324,000 56 371,000 371,000 -657,000 -13,324,000 -13,610,000 57 388,000 388,000 -671,000 -13,610,000 -13,893,000 58 405,000 405,000 -685,000 -13,893,000 -14,172,000 59 424,000 424,000 -698,000 -14,172,000 -14,447,000 60 443,000 122,000 424,000 2,057,000 3,045,000 -646,000 -14,447,000 -12,048,000 61 463,000 463,000 -591,000 -12,048,000 -12,176,000 62 483,000 483,000 -597,000 -12,176,000 -12,289,000 63 505,000 505,000 -602,000 -12,289,000 -12,386,000 64 528,000 528,000 -606,000 -12,386,000 -12,464,000 65 270,000 552,000 152,000 973,000 -599,000 -12,464,000 -12,089,000 66 577,000 577,000 -590,000 -12,089,000 -12,103,000 67 602,000 602,000 -590,000 -12,103,000 -12,090,000 68 630,000 630,000 -589,000 -12,090,000 -12,050,000 69 658,000 658,000 -586,000 -12,050,000 -11,978,000 70 688,000 189,000 658,000 1,534,000 -561,000 -11,978,000 -11,004,000 71 718,000 718,000 -532,000 -11,004,000 -10,818,000 72 751,000 751,000 -522,000 -10,818,000 -10,589,000 73 785,000 785,000 -510,000 -10,589,000 -10,314,000 74 820,000 820,000 -495,000 -10,314,000 -9,990,000 75 857,000 236,000 1,092,000 -472,000 -9,990,000 -9,369,000

Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item 9