application no: application type: full case officer: ward: expiry...

Application No: 2019/2569 Application Type: FULL Case Officer: Matt Harris Ward: Molesey West Ward Expiry Date: 12/12/2019

Location: Molesey Football & Social Club 412 Walton Road West Molesey Surrey KT8 2JG and 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close

Proposal: Development comprising 50 flats, day nursery and clubhouse including changing rooms and covered seating for Football Club following demolition of existing clubhouse and stand and Nos 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close.

Applicant: Molesey Football & Social Club, Rushmon Homes and PA Housing Agent: Mr Paul Dickinson

Paul Dickinson and Associates Highway House Lower Froyle Hampshire GU34 4NB

Recommendation: Recommendation A

Permit subject to receipt of satisfactory legal agreement within 3 months of the Committee resolution or an extended period as agreed with the Head of Planning Services. Recommendation B

If a satisfactory legal agreement is not completed and received with 3 months of the Committee resolution or an extended period as agreed with the Head of Planning Services, delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning Services to refuse planning permission.

R e p o r t

Description

1. The application site relates to a large site which encompasses Molesey Football Club (MFC), parking and land around it (but excluding the actual football pitch along with its associated access off Walton Road which also serves the new housing development.

2. The other part of the application site is access off the nearby residential road of Grange Close

and comprises of two blocks of two storey flats which form No’s. 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close. This part of the site is wholly residential. Constraints

3. The relevant planning constraints are:

• Classified Road (Walton Road) • Air Quality Management Area to front of the site • Low and Medium Risk Surface Water Flooding to the south-eastern corner of the site

Policy

4. In addition to the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance, the following local policies and guidance are relevant to the determination of this application:

Core Strategy 2011 CS1 - Spatial Strategy

CS2 - Housing provision, location and distribution CS7 - East and West Molesey

CS14 - Green Infrastructure CS15 - Biodiversity CS16 - Social and Community Infrastructure CS17 - Local Character, Density and Design CS19 - Housing type and size CS21 - Affordable Housing CS25 - Travel and Accessibility CS26 - Flooding CS27 - Sustainable Buildings Development Management Plan 2015 DM1 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development DM2 - Design and amenity DM4 - Comprehensive redevelopment DM5 - Pollution DM6 - Landscape and trees DM7 - Access and parking DM8 - Refuse, recycling and external plant DM9 - Social and Community Infrastructure DM10 - Housing DM11 - Employment DM21 - Nature Conservation and biodiversity Design & Character SPD 2012 Flood Risk SPD 2016 Developers Contributions SPD 2012

Relevant Planning History

5. The site has an extensive planning history, the most recent is set out below:

6. Planning application 2017/4137 was refused by the Planning Committee on 6 November 2018 for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development by reason of its scale, mass and height, particularly Block B would have an overbearing impact on neighbours in Mole Place and Grange Close contrary to policy DM2.

2. The proposal fails to enhance or preserve the character of the area contrary to policy DM2.

3. The proposed development would fail to provide sufficient and accessible amenity space contrary to policy CS14.

7. The decision was subsequently appealed and the Inspector dismissed the appeal for the

following reasons:

1. By reason of the height, the proposed development would not preserve or enhance the character of the area and therefore would not comply with Policy DM2.

2. As a result of the combined scale, height and mass of the buildings proposed, the appeal development would have an overbearing effect on occupants of Mole Place and Grange Close, and therefore would not represent high quality design or offer appropriate outlook, as sought by Policy DM2.

8. The Inspector considered that there would be sufficient and accessible amenity space to serve the development.

Reference Description Decision

2017/4137 Development comprising 50 flats, day nursery and clubhouse including changing rooms and covered seating for Football Club following demolition of existing clubhouse and stand and Nos 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close.

Refused and Appeal Dismissed.

2017/2867 Combine two existing vehicular accesses into one, reconfiguration of existing car parking layout and creation of new soft landscaping areas.

Granted

2015/3282 Part four/part three storey block incorporating D1 (Non residential Institutions) use and D2 (Assembly & Leisure) use at ground floor level and 22 flats on upper floors, with single storey function hall and changing rooms to side with covered access, two detached part three/part two storey blocks, incorporating 11 flats and 6 flats (affordable units) following the demolition of existing clubhouse and 22-25 and 30-33 Grange Close.

Withdrawn

2011/7916 6 pairs of two storey semidetached houses, 4 two-storey terraced houses and 4 2-bed flats with associated parking/garages, entrance gates, relocation of football pitch and fencing, new turnstiles, relocated dugout and stands, replacement floodlights and protective fencing

Granted

9. The Inspector considered the planning balance and dismissed the Appeal due to the

combination of harm to the character of the area, particularly as a result of the height of the development, and the harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupants, which was considered to outweigh the benefits of the scheme. Proposal

10. Planning permission is being sort for a development comprising 50 flats (24 markets and 26 affordable), a temporary day nursery and clubhouse including changing rooms and covered seating for Football Club following demolition of existing clubhouse and stand and No’s 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close.

11. The application has been amended from the previous application by reducing Building B to

two storeys with accommodation in the roof and reducing Building C to single storey. Building A remains unchanged. The proposed nursery has been removed and a temporary nursery is proposed to the front of the site.

12. The development at MFC, is accessed from the southern side of Walton Road. The main

component of the development on this site is a two-storey building with rooms in the roofspace, located relatively on the footprint of the existing club house and stand, along with proposed new stands and new parking arrangement.

13. This building is referred to as ‘Building B’, the main ridge height would be 9.3m in height

(reduced from 12.75m from the previous application) with the lift shaft housing having a ridge height of 9.9m. Building B provides 21 x 2 bed units and 3 x 1 bed units. The permanent nursery has been removed from this building.

14. The new Clubhouse building would be single storey in height and will be located to the south

of Building B and would measure a maximum of 35.7m in length by 10.5m in depth and have a maximum ridge height of 4m facing the pitch and 3.7m facing the side/rear gardens of the residential properties within Grange Close (the refused scheme was 33.1m in length by 11.5m in depth, and 6.55m in height facing the pitch and a height of 6.24m facing the side/rear gardens of the residential properties within Grange Close).

15. The ground floor of the Clubhouse building will incorporate the following: • Home and visitor changing rooms • 2x officials changing rooms • Physio room • Multi-function hall/meeting/ bar/gym space • Kitchen storage areas • Toilets and plant room • Access to the proposed new stand (seating area for spectators)

16. The remaining building ‘Building A’ will be accessed via Grange Close. This will largely be located on the footprint of No’s. 22-29 and 30-33 Grange Close, which would be demolished as part of this proposal. The building has not been revised since the previous submission would be two storeys in height with rooms in the roofspace, be ‘L’ shaped in design and has a maximum footprint of 42.75m by 34.65m. The roof varies in height significantly with the maximum ridge height being 10.86m and the lowest being 9.42m. This building will comprise 26 units all of which have been set-a-side for affordable housing. The building includes 14x 2-bed units and 12x 1-bed units.

17. Each of the proposed buildings provide refuse areas, associated parking, cycle storage areas and areas in which landscaping can take place.

18. The final element of the proposal is the temporary nursery building, which would be located directly adjacent to the access off of Walton Road for 18 months throughout the duration of the construction phase. The proposed building would be single storey in nature and measure 21m in length by 9.6m in depth and have a ridge height of 3.37m. This would house a single

room for nursery accommodation as well as provide toilets and a lobby/coat area. A temporary rubber play surface would be required to be installed to allow outdoor play along with 2m high acoustic fencing.

19. The applicant has submitted the following documents in support of the application – Design and Access Statement, Transport Statement, Affordable Housing Statement, Financial Viability Appraisal, Tree Survey and Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Phase 1 Ecological Report, Archaeological Desk Based Assessment, Energy Statement, Drainage Strategy (and supplementary report), and Construction Methodology Statement. Representations:

20. The Council wrote to 124 neighbouring properties and placed four site notices advertising the application.

21. 25 letters of objection (from 20 addresses) and 9 letters of observation have been received, as summarised below: • Previous reasons for refusal applicable in current application. • Plans are not in keeping with the area. • Insufficient parking and additional cars in congested area. • Risk to emergency vehicles access. • No designated spaces for football club/bus. • Area becoming overcrowded by other developments and concerns with impact on

infrastructure such roads, doctors, dentists, schools, employment, policing and shops. • Too large scale and dense in small space. • Overlooking and invasion of privacy given heights towards properties in Mole Place,

Walton Road, Grange Road, and Grange Close. • Overbearing development. • Deep size and extra height does not respect the existing grain of the area. • Patios and balconies encourage additional noise and overlooking. • Loss of light and overshadowing. • Impact on community of loss and removal of affordable nursery and local nurseries do not

have enough places. • Alternative site for nursery should be found. • Increased disturbance and noise. • Housing not compatible with entertainment venue. • Concerns with closure of football club. • Flooding and surface water flooding. • Impact on local drainage and sewage systems. • Wildlife and natural environment concern with removal of trees. • The proposed nursery is not aesthetically pleasing, detracting from the local area. • Nursery position would block view of the road when existing the site. • Construction plans show Grange Close and Road used as access – quiet roads, with

children playing in the open spaces. Traffic will cause damage to local resident’s vehicles. • Insufficient construction parking areas. Resulting in additional noise and traffic. • Refuse bin storage insufficient and shortfall. Overflow and smells, disturbance and rodent

problem. Increased litter. • Refuse storage sheds and landscaping does not enhance the public realm. • Car parking dominates the landscape. • Plans do not show access to the football club during construction. • No jobs for the local community. • Covenants on the land and grounds left to the people of Molesey. • Concerns with further future development. • Overdevelopment of the area. • Increased pollution. • Concerns with location of alleyway and impact of loss of privacy, and rubbish thrown into

the garden. • Tenure mix not integrated, contrary to Policy CS17. • Comments about the sums due to creditors is understated.

22. 134 letters of support (from 115 addresses) have been received, as summarised below: • The proposal ensures the survival and community need for the football club, an integral

part of the area. • Existing buildings needs updating and refurbishment. • Provision of community facility. • Site hosts regular charity events. • Regeneration and improvement to area, including Grange Close. • Benefit of housing support. • Provision of affordable housing. • Encourages young people to adopt an active lifestyle. • Sport participation benefits community. • Use of facilities for local business and schools. • New flats necessary to meet demand. • Need for new housing. • Helps Elmbridge meet Local Plan targets. • Plans adjusted in keeping with the community and in line with previous objections.

Consultations

23. EBC Environmental Health – Noise and Pollution – No objection subject to submission of a detailed noise impact assessment, to prevent noise and disturbance between the future residents, the football club and existing residents.

24. EBC Environmental Health – Contaminated Land – Part of the site was previously part of a light industrial site and give the past uses and age of existing buildings, conditions are recommended regarding potential contamination, and informatives regarding contamination assessments and asbestos.

25. EBC Leisure and Cultural Services – The proposed facilities would meet the identified strategic needs of Sport England, Everybody Active Every Day, Surrey’s Health and Wellbeing Strategy, Surrey Physical Activity Strategy and Elmbridge Physical Activity Strategy. In addition, the facilities meet the sporting need for one of the Borough’s high profile sports clubs, which are required by the FA to continue to play at this level. No objections are raised but recommend a Community Use Agreement prior to opening to secure community use.

26. EBC Trees – No formal response has been received, however no objections were raised to the application 2017/4137 subject to conditions, stating that – ‘Building A is moving closer to a number of retained trees (T11, T12 & T13) when compared with the previous proposal, however, these trees can tolerate a degree of pruning without much of an impact upon their health’. Conditions were recommended regarding tree protection and pre-commencement inspection.

27. Verbal advice has been received from the Council’s Tree Officer advising that there does not appear to be any material change in circumstances in respect of trees. Any additional comments will be provided to Members by way of an update.

28. EBC Housing Services – No objections and provide comments on affordable housing. Confirm that the proposal exceeds policy requirements in respect of social housing and is welcomed by Housing Services.

29. EBC Environmental Services – Provides comments regarding the refuse collection vehicle entering the site in regards to the access road; waste from residential and commercial sources should remain segregated at all times; guidance regarding the space allocated for storage of waste containers in the bin area to provide enough capacity for the development; all properties will require enough room to house containers for refuse, recycling and food waste, and garden waste bins provided where applicable; and all units should have sufficient space in the kitchen to segregate recyclable and non-recyclable waste and store until taken out to the bins. These matters are included as informatives.

30. Surrey Sustainable Urban Drainage – Initially raised concerns with regards to the proposed drainage scheme. The applicant submitted further information and the LLFA are satisfied that the proposed drainage scheme meets the requirements and no objections are raised subject to conditions regarding detailed design of a surface water drainage scheme, and submission of a verification report.

31. SCC Transport Development Planning – The Highway Authority note the similarities with the previous application and has assessed the impact of the proposal on highway safety and capacity and raised no objections subject to conditions/informatives regarding new and modified accesses, parking and turning, compliance with the submitted construction transport management plan, and electric vehicle charging provision. The development is considered to be in accordance with policy DM7 of the Development Management Plan and CS25 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011.

32. Environment Agency – No objection.

33. No comments received from Surrey Environment and Infrastructure at the time of the report.

Positive and Proactive Engagement

34. The National Planning Policy Framework requires local planning authorities to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner to resolve problems before the application is submitted and to foster the delivery of sustainable development. This requirement is met within Elmbridge through the availability of pre-application advice.

35. Formal pre-application advice was sought prior to the submission of the application (PreApp133974388). This concluded that the amendments would appear to have overcome the Inspector’s reasons to dismiss the Appeal, in respect of the height and scale of the proposed development.

36. Advice (PreApp1319111) was also sought in 2016 following the withdrawal of the previous application (2015/3282) the conclusion of the initial response was that the scheme was considered to be moving forwards, addressing a number of the Council’s previous concerns.

Planning Considerations

37. The main planning considerations in the determination of this application are: • Principle of the Development • Design Considerations • Impact on Neighbouring Amenity • Provision of a Suitable Residential Environment (including trees and landscaping) • Highway Safety and Parking • Sustainable Urban Drainage and other Environmental Considerations • Financial Considerations

38. Consideration will be given to whether the application overcomes the reasons for Dismissed

Appeal (2017/4137).

39. Since the previous application was dismissed, the NPPF has been revised. The Inspector’s Appeal Decision reflects the updated NPPF. Principle of the Development

40. The previous application sets out that the principle of the proposed development is acceptable on the site and this did not form a reason for refusal.

41. The application site relates to an existing private car parking and garaging area and therefore

falls within the definition of previously developed land. The site is in a highly sustainable location, within close proximity to services, infrastructure and transport links.

42. The Core Strategy indicates that there is scope for residential development through the redevelopment of existing sites with well-designed schemes that integrate with and enhance the local character. The new development is required to deliver high quality design, which maximises the efficient use of land and which responds to the positive features of individual locations; integrating sensitively with locally distinct townscape while protecting the amenities of those living in the area. Innovative contemporary design that embraces sustainability and improves local character will be supported. The Council promotes development that contributes to an overall housing target of 40 dwellings per hectare and achieves a minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare (dph).

43. The NPPF in regard to the making effective use of land, states at para. 117:

‘Planning policies and decisions should promote an effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, whilst safeguarding and improving the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living conditions’.

44. In regard to achieving appropriate densities, Para. 123 states

‘Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities, and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site’, and this is supported by point C) of Para. 123 which states: ‘local planning authorities should refuse applications which they consider fail to make efficient use of land, taking into account the policies in this Framework. In this context, when considering applications for housing, authorities should take a flexible approach in applying policies or guidance relating to daylight and sunlight, where they would otherwise inhibit making efficient use of a site (as long as the resulting scheme would provide acceptable living standards).’

45. Para 122 in regard to achieving appropriate densities further states that:

‘Planning policies and decisions should support development that makes efficient use of land, taking into account:

a) The identified need for different types of housing and other forms of development, and the availability of land suitable for accommodating it.’

46. In light of this policy framework and given the contribution small sites make towards meeting

housing need, any applications must seek to make the most efficient use of land. The proposal would represent a development density of approx. 61dph on this 0.82Ha site. This would comply with the locally adopted density policy and would make the most efficient use of land.

47. As identified above in para. 122a of the NPPF, development should meet the identified need for housing, which is identified within the 2016 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) for Kingston and North Surrey. The SHMA identifies the need within Elmbridge is for smaller 1-2 bedroom units. The proposal would result in the loss 12 existing units however, the scheme under consideration provides 35 x 2 bed units and 15 x 1 bed units (varied from 39 x 2 bed and 11 x 1 bed), which would help to meet the identified housing need as set out in policy CS19.

48. In addition, the scheme includes a new clubhouse facility for Molesey FC. Ultimately this

proposal through the sale of the land and the sale of the market housing ensure that the financial security of the football club, given that this would override the existing debt.

49. It is acknowledged that the proposal would result in the long-term loss of a nursery on the site, contrary to Policy CS16 which resist the loss of existing social and community facilities, unless it can be demonstrated that:

• the facility is no longer needed for its original purpose or viable for any other social or community use; or

• an alternative facility will be provided in a location with an equal level of accessibility for the population it is intended to serve,

• there is no requirement from any other public service provider for an alternative community or social facility that could be met through a change of use or redevelopment.

50. Details have been submitted with the application indicating that the football club is under considerable threat of closure due to mounting debts. The development and requirement for additional housing rather than a nursery would secure the football clubs long term future. The proposal would also enhance the facilities at the football club, in accordance with Policies CS16 and DM9.

51. The scheme includes the provision of a temporary nursery at the front of the site for 18 months throughout the duration of the construction phase and this is considered to allow sufficient time for the relocation of the nursery to another premises.

52. On balance, it is considered that the public benefit of additional housing on the site that contributes to the Council’s housing need, and potential loss of the football club, which provides its own community facilities and public benefits, outweighs the loss of the nursery and this is considered to be acceptable in this instance. A condition is recommended requiring the temporary nursery and associated buildings to be removed and the land made good 18 months after the date of the commencement of the demolition of the existing clubhouse.

53. It is therefore considered that the principle of the redevelopment and intensification in the use of the site, which represents an efficient and effective use of land, as required by Policy CS17 and the NPPF would be considered acceptable.

Design Considerations

54. The NPPF seeks presumption in favour of sustainable development with emphasis on the need to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings, as well as taking account of the character of different areas. It further states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

55. Policy CS1 and CS2, along with policy CS7 seek to deliver efficient use of urban land for housing development by delivering high density housing in the most sustainable locations, taking account of relative flood risk, in a way that integrates with and enhances local character.

56. Policy CS17 states that new development will be required to deliver high quality and inclusive sustainable design, which maximise the efficient use of urban land whilst responding to the positive features of individual locations, integrating sensitively with the local distinctive townscape. Innovative contemporary design that embraces sustainability and improves local character will be supported. The policy continues that in order to promote the best use of urban land an overall target density of 40 dwellings per hectare will be sought for new development.

57. Policy DM2 states that all new development should achieve high quality design and that proposals should preserve or enhance the character of the area, taking account of design guidance detailed in the Design and Character SPD, with particular regard to; Appearance, scale, mass, height, levels and topography, prevailing pattern of built development and separation distances to plot boundaries.

58. In respect of design, paragraph 7 above sets out that planning application 2017/4137 was refused for the following reason:

1. The proposal fails to enhance or preserve the character of the area contrary to policy DM2.

59. The Inspector in reaching his decision on the Appeal ruled the following:

1. By reason of the height, the proposed development would not preserve or enhance the character of the area and therefore would not comply with Policy DM2.

60. The Inspector considered the prevailing pattern of development being two storey pitched roof

buildings, and considered the height of the building (Building B) encompassing a three storey building and additional roof would be out of character with the surrounding development. No comments were made regarding Building A.

61. The height of Building B has been significantly reduced from 12.7m to 9.3m following the refused application. The proposed building would appear as two storey in scale, with accommodation in the roof, utilising dormer windows and rooflights. The scale of the proposed building would reduce at the closet juncture with the properties located on Mole Place. The amendments significantly reduce the height, bulk and mass of the proposed building, and it is considered the form would address and overcome the previous reasons for refusal resulting in a development that would complement and would not detract from the character of the area.

62. In regards to the clubhouse building (Building C), this has been revised to single storey in scale and reduced in height. The building would need to provide a number of different facilities, these include, home and away changing rooms, separate changing rooms for the match officials, a bar/café area and have a minimum of 150 seats in the stand in order to meet the Football Associations minimum requirements to play football matches at the level which Molesey FC play. Due to its location and height this proposed building, as amended, is not considered to materially harm upon the visual character of the area.

63. The proposed designs of the permanent buildings and refuse stores are considered to be acceptable in appearance and due to their respective locations and set back from Walton Road, they are not considered to unacceptably harm upon the views from within any of the street scenes or detract upon the visual character of the area.

64. The temporary building would create some impact visual upon the views from within Walton

Road, given that the single storey temporary building would be in a location where there are currently no buildings. Whilst this would not be an ideal, the situation would be an 18 month temporary period whilst the construction of the development is completed. A condition is recommended ensuring the temporary building would be removed in the interest of visual amenities. The temporary building is set back from the road by a sufficient distance to ensure visibility splays through Walton Road, and no objections are raised by the County Highway Authority in this respect.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

65. In respect of neighbouring amenity, paragraph 7 above sets out that planning application 2017/4137 was refused for the following reason:

a. The proposed development by reason of its scale, mass and height, particularly Block B would have an overbearing impact on neighbours in Mole Place and Grange Close contrary to policy DM2.

66. Meanwhile the Inspector concluded that b. As a result of the combined scale, height and mass of the buildings proposed, the

appeal development would have an overbearing effect on occupants of Mole Place and Grange Close, and therefore would not represent high quality design offer appropriate outlook, as sought by Policy DM2.

67. As set out above, Building B has been considerably reduced in height and therefore scale and

mass. This, in combination with the juxtaposition of Building B in comparison to the adjacent properties in Mole Place and Grange Close, and the staggered form of the building, is considered to ensure there would be no adverse impacts to the outlook of these properties, and the proposed development would not be overbearing, therefore overcoming the previous reasons for refusal.

68. The Inspector considered that Building C would dominate the outlook from the garden and conservatory of No. 15 Grange Close, and would therefore be overbearing to the occupants. The proposed clubhouse building has been reduced from 6.2 metres to 3.7 metres in height facing towards the boundary with Grange Close. The proposal as amended would be single storey in height and located at a good distance to the boundaries of the neighbouring residential properties on Grange Close, and is considered to afford adequate outlook to the occupiers of these properties, in accordance with Policy DM2, thereby overcoming the previous reasons for refusal.

69. The Inspector raised no concerns regarding Building A, which retains a separation distance to the rear boundary of the residential units to the north 11.03m (when measured from the northern elevation) the northern project is considerably closer to the rear boundaries of the units to the north, however given the oblique angle of the windows this is not considered to be harmful to the existing or future occupiers, the rear boundary to the residential units to the east is 14.61m and the side boundary of the residential units to south is 14.93m. The distance between Building A and Building B will be a minimum of 19m.

70. No objections have been raised by the Inspector regarding overlooking or loss of privacy, and due to the position and orientation of Building B, the siting of windows and separation distances to boundaries, it is considered that there would be no undue overlooking or loss of privacy towards properties on Grange Close and Mole Place. A condition is considered to be necessary to ensure the bathroom windows of Plots 1 and 18 within Building B are obscurely glazed and fixed shut above 1.7m in perpetuity to maintain the privacy of properties within Mole Place.

71. The proposed development would include patios and balconies for external amenity for the future occupiers, however given the locations and separation distances, these are not considered to result in obtrusive levels of noise that would be detrimental to neighbouring amenity.

72. It is therefore concluded that the proposed development would represent a high quality development that affords sufficient outlook to neighbouring properties and therefore overcomes the previous reason for refusal. Provision of a Suitable Residential Environment (including trees and landscaping)

73. The final reason for refusal was 1. The proposed development would fail to provide sufficient and accessible amenity

space contrary to policy CS14.

74. However, the Inspector concluded that Policy CS14 does not apply in this case as the scheme would not involve the loss of green infrastructure and is for 50 dwellings. The Inspector considered the amenity space adjacent to Building A, landscaping, private amenity space and existing public open space at Molesey Recreation Ground and Brende Gardens. The Inspector set out that to access Molesey Recreation Ground would require crossing Walton Road, however, as the road is relatively straight, is of limited width, has a 30mph speed limit and has limited history of road accidents involving pedestrians, and therefore did not consider Walton Road to be too dangerous for the occupants of the proposed development to cross of access Molesey Recreation Ground safely. The Inspector therefore concluded that the proposal would provide sufficient and accessible amenity space for the future occupiers.

75. Notwithstanding the above, Policy DM6 and DM10 sets out that proposed new residential development should provide an appropriate level of lighting, outlook and amenity to all habitable rooms and be of suitable space standards. Developments are also expected to enhance existing landscaping and allow visual interest and amenity.

76. Policy DM5 states that new development located near to existing noise, odour or light generating uses will be expected to demonstrate that the proposal is compatible and will not result in unacceptable living standards.

77. In this instance each of the proposed new units meet the minimum meets the minimum requirements for new dwellings as indicated within the Technical housing standards – nationally described space standards. The one bed units will range from 50sqm to 58sqm and the two bed units from 60sqm to 86sqm.

78. The Council’s Environmental Health (Noise and Pollution) Officer has confirmed that subject to a condition being imposed to submit a detailed noise impact assessment assessing the current noise climate and model the likely noise impact of the various activities at the football club on nearby residents, and where necessary propose suitable noise mitigation measures to protect the amenity of local residents. No objections are raised in regards to pollution or air quality.

79. Within a short walk of the application site (1km or less) there are a variety of shops, banks, restaurants, convenience stores, places of worship, hairdressers and a recreation ground. On this basis, it is considered that the occupiers of the proposed new units will be well served and the reliance on the use of the private car for short journeys is likely to be reduced.

80. The proposed development provides numerous refuse storage areas, all of which are easily

accessible. The applicants within their Transport Statement have identified a swept path to show that it is possible for refuse vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward gear on collection days. The Council’s Environmental Services Officer has raised no objection to the proposed refuse storage areas and informatives are recommended regarding the capacity requirements.

81. Whilst the Council’s Tree Officer has not provided a formal response to the current application,

an assessment was undertaken for the previous scheme (ref: 2017/4137) in regards to the proposed impact that this proposal would have upon the trees being retained. In this instance Building A is moving closer to T11, T12 and T13. However, the majority of the building is considered to be outside of the root protection area of these trees. Whilst these trees will potentially lead to being overbearing upon the future occupiers of the neighbouring residential units these trees can tolerate a degree of pruning without too much of an impact on their health and long-term amenity. In this regard no objection was raised subject to suitably worded tree protection conditions being imposed.

82. The amended scheme under consideration does not change the relationship of Building A, whilst Buildings B and C, which have been amended would not encroach any closer to trees than the previous scheme. It is noted that there would be trees removed to the southern end of the site to accommodate the football club parking, however new planting is proposed in this location and a condition is recommended to ensure a landscaping scheme is submitted to the LPA.

83. It is considered that the same conclusions can be drawn and the proposal would not have an adverse impact on trees on the site, subject to conditions regarding tree protection and retention. Highway Safety and Parking

84. Policy DM7 sets out that parking provision should be appropriate to the development and not result in an increase in on-street parking stress that would be detrimental to the amenities of local residents. In such instances, a minimum provision of one space per residential unit will be required. Garaging, cycle stores and car parking designs should be integrated into the scheme and respect the character of the area.

85. No objections were raised to the previous application by the Planning Inspector.

86. This proposal provides 96 vehicle parking spaces of which 52 of these will be set-a-side for

the occupiers of the residential units which amounts to one space per unit with 2 visitor spaces and the remaining 44 spaces being for the football club. The number of spaces being retained for the football club is no lower than that which was granted as part of the previous re-development of the site. The parking layout when viewed from the public realm is not considered to be dissimilar to the existing situation.

87. The submitted plans include provision of parking spaces for the temporary nursery. Whilst Space 10 would be unusable due to the overhang of the nursey building, it is considered that sufficient parking is maintained across the site during the construction of the development for the use of staff, visitors and members of the nursery and the football club.

88. The proposal also includes provision for No. 54 secure cycle parking spaces. No. 30 of these will be for the occupiers of Building A and No. 24 will be for the occupiers of Building B.

89. In this instance it is considered that the number of proposed spaces in conjunction with the number of secure cycle spaces being provided is considered appropriate for the development under consideration.

90. The Highway Authority as part of their consultation have identified that the access from Walton Road has already been assessed and agreed as part of a previous permission 2017/2867. However, as part of this proposal this access would serve as the access for the and 24 new dwellings, and potentially new traffic associated with the improvements to the football club. The other access, from Grange Close, will serve the remain 26 dwellings following the demolition of the existing 12 units.

91. As part of the submission the applicant has provided a Transport Statement which includes

details of the likely trips generated from the proposed housing development, and the comings and goings at the football club.

92. The Highway Authority as part of their response have identified that the primary concern is the number of trips generated associated with the new dwellings. Having review the Transport Statement the Highway Authority are satisfied that the suggested increase in two-way trips during the peak periods both onto Walton Road and Grange Road are not likely to lead to any significant or severe impact on the local highway network in terms of safety or capacity.

93. The Highway Authority has concluded that the proposal will not impact upon highway safety, capacity or policy grounds provided that the conditions are imposed regarding new and modified access, parking and turning, compliance with the submitted construction transport management plan, and electric vehicle charging provision. The CTMP sets out matters regarding construction traffic and parking.

94. The CHA requires electric vehicle charging provision for each proposed dwelling whereas the

applicants submission provides 20% of residential parking spaces with electric vehicle charging points. In accordance with County guidance it is considered reasonable to apply a condition requiring the details of a scheme to be submitted to the Council prior to occupation of the development. Sustainable Urban Drainage and other Environmental Considerations

95. The site is located within Flood Zone 1, although the south-eastern corner falls within an area of medium risk surface water flooding. No objections are raised by the Environment Agency. The proposed residential buildings would be located outside of this area, although Building C and the football club parking would straddle this area. No Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted with the application, however a detailed sustainable urban drainage report has been submitted setting out the approach across the site ensuring there would be no harmful displacement of surface water. The club parking will be constructed of grasscrete allow surface water infiltration, and the club building would not be habitable and therefore does not increase the risk of flooding for occupants of the development.

96. The Government has strengthened planning policy on the provision of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) for ‘major’ planning applications which is being introduced from 6 April 2015 (Paragraph 163 and 165 of National Planning Policy Framework and Ministerial Statement on SuDS). As per the guidance issued by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG), all ‘major’ planning applications being determined from 6 April 2015, must consider sustainable drainage systems. Developers are advised to assess the suitability of sustainable drainage systems in accordance with the NPPF. Sustainable drainage systems should be designed in line with national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS.

97. SuDS must be properly designed to ensure that the maintenance and operation costs are proportionate and sustainable for the lifetime of the development. Hydraulic calculation and drawings to support the design need to be provided along with proposed standards of operation and maintenance in accordance with the NPPF.

98. In this regard the applicant has provided Drainage Strategy (ref: 191133/DS/JR/KBL/02 First Issue, prepared by Lanmor Consulting dated September 2019) and Letter to Elmbridge BC (ref: KL/ml/Gen, prepared by Lanmor Consulting dated 25 October 2019). The LLFA has assessed the information provided within these documents and confirmed that subject to suitably worded conditions being imposed, they are satisfied with the content of the submitted drainage reports.

99. Policy CS27 Sustainable Buildings sets out that on residential development of ten or more units that the Council will expect development to meet the equivalent of level four of the (former) Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) in relation to energy and C02 emissions. The applicants in this instance have provided an Energy Report (ref: 19/2618 ene rev 0, prepared by dated September 2019, prepared by Richard Child BA AaPS of AED Design). This report concludes that the Council’s targets will be met in terms of CS27 and provide a CO2 reduction in excess of the 45.85% requirement. The recommendation is to provide solar photovoltaic panels horizontally across the residential blocks and solar photovoltaic panels to be provided to the roof of the changing rooms block. It is however, suggested that a condition be imposed to ensure that the details within the submitted Energy Report are carried through. Financial Considerations New Homes Bonus

100. Section 70 subsection 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) states that any local financial considerations are a matter to which local planning authorities must have regard to in determining planning applications; as far as they are material for the application. The weight to be attached to these considerations is a matter for the Council.

101. The New Homes Bonus is a grant paid by central government to local councils for increasing

the number of homes and their use. The New Homes Bonus is paid each year for 4 years. It is based on the amount of extra Council Tax revenue raised for new-build homes, conversions and long-term empty homes brought back into use. There is also an extra payment for providing affordable homes. The New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination for 2019/20 is £957,930 (approx.).

102. Local financial considerations are defined as grants from Government or sums payable to the

authority under the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This means that the New Homes Bonus is capable of being a material consideration where relevant. In the current case, the approval of the application would mean that the New Homes Bonus would be payable for the net increase in dwellings from this development. Affordable Housing

103. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that development resulting in the net gain of 15 and more residential units should provide 40% of the gross number of dwellings on-site as affordable housing.

104. It is acknowledged that a revised National Planning Policy Framework has been published and

is a material consideration in the determination of all relevant planning applications. However, as set out in Section 38(6) of Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the starting point for any decision is the Development Plan unless material consideration(s) indicate otherwise. As set out in paragraph 2 of the NPPF, this approach is required by planning law. It is therefore for the decision-maker to determine the weight to be applied.

105. Paragraph 63 of the NPPF states that ‘provision of affordable housing should not be sought

for residential developments that are not major developments, other than in designated rural areas (where policies may set out a lower threshold of 5 units or fewer)’. Elmbridge Borough is not a designated rural area and major development sites are defined in the NPPF as

development of 10 or more homes, or the site has an area of 0.5 hectares of more. Nevertheless, as set out in paragraph 3 of the NPPF, the Framework should be read as a whole (including its footnotes and annexes). In this context the following NPPF policies are also relevant in regard to the Council’s continuation to apply policy CS21.

106. Paragraph 59 of the NPPF state that within the context of significantly boosting the supply of

homes ‘… that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed’. Paragraph 61 states ‘… the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, those who require affordable housing…’ Finally, paragraph 62 states:

‘Where a need for affordable housing is identified, planning policies should specify the type of affordable housing required, and expect it to be on-site unless:

off-site provision or an appropriate financial contribution in lieu can be robustly justified…’

107. Paragraph 63 of the NPPF is a clear continuation of the approach to developer contributions

on small sites as set out in Government’s Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) (28 November 2014) and subsequent changes to Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) dated 19 May 2016. In response to this policy change, the Council set out in its Statement on the WMS (Update – February 2017), that its position was to continue to consider on a case by case basis whether local circumstances with regard to affordable housing and the nature of the development sites in the Borough were sufficient to warrant the application of policy CS21, or whether greater weight should be attached to the WMS and changes to PPG.

108. The Council’s approach has been repeatedly upheld by Appeal Inspectors recognising that

policy CS21 was consistent with other policies of the NPPF (paragraphs 47 and 50 (NPPF, 2012)) which required local planning authorities to meet the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing and where they have identified that affordable housing is needed, set policies for meeting this need on site, unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of broadly equivalent value can be robustly justified. Furthermore, several Appeal Inspectors noted that whilst the WMS was a material consideration of considerable importance and weight, the intention of the WMS is to ensure that financial contributions do not become a disproportionate burden for small scale developers and thus frustrate housing supply. Appeal Inspectors have continuously addressed the Council’s Statement on the WMS (referenced above) and the significant difficulty in the delivery of affordable housing in the least affordable authority in England outside of London, noting that small sites make a significant contribution towards the delivery of affordable housing in the Borough.

109. Appeal Inspectors have also stated that there has been no substantive evidence to

demonstrate that the requirements of policy CS21 are placing an unreasonable or disproportionate burden on developers. As a consequence, it has been found that whilst the WMS carried considerable weight, Inspectors do not consider it to outweigh the development plan given the acute and substantial need for affordable housing in the Borough (as evidenced by the Kingston & North-East Surrey Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)) (2016) and the importance of delivery through small sites towards this.

110. On the basis of the above and the evidence in relation to local housing need, affordability and

housing land supply (as summarised in the Council’s Statement (Update – February 2017)), the Council will continue with its approach to apply Policy CS21 in the decision-making process where relevant. The Council has provided clear evidence of the acute need for affordable housing whereas, little evidence has been submitted by applicants suggesting that policy CS21 is having a disproportionate effect on small schemes. Where evidence is submitted to the contrary, the Council will, in accordance with policy CS21 and the Development Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (2012), allow flexibility.

111. An agreed Affordable Housing provision was made within the previously refused application,

which provided 26 affordable units (16 shared ownership and 10 affordable rented). 112. As set out above Policy CS21 requires the proportion of affordable units to amount to 40% of

the gross number of units on the site. This proposal will provide 26 of the 50 units as affordable units, which amounts to 52% of the total number of units.

113. The application is clear in delivering a significant gain in the number of affordable homes

proposed and the scheme also offers benefits in terms of the quality of the proposed affordable housing relative to the current provision. The proposal offers a mix of dwelling sizes, with the proposed Affordable homes capable of accommodating significantly more people than the existing stock (up to a maximum of 76 bed-spaces compared to the existing 24), which recognises as a housing gain. Consequently, the application does comply with policy, in terms of the overall amount of affordable housing to be provided. It will evidently deliver significant improvements in the quality of accommodation, whilst also providing family-sized accommodation along with one and two bedroomed properties suitable for first time buyers and others renting.

114. As to the affordable housing mix within the development the Council’s Developer

Contributions: the SPD advises that the Council expects that 70% of affordable housing should be provided as rented accommodation, with the balance to be provided as intermediate tenures, which is typically in the form of shared ownership. These proportions are usually applied to the policy target (i.e. 40% in this case). The proposed affordable housing comprises 16 shared ownership homes and 10 dwellings proposed as affordable rent. Based on a 70/30 percentage split of 40% of the provision a scheme fully following our guidance would deliver a total of 14 affordable rented units, with the remainder as shared ownership properties. The slight under-provision of 4 homes for rent needs to be considered against the delivery of six additional affordable homes over and above the policy requirement.

115. When making the original application (ref: 2017/4137), the applicant submitted a financial

viability appraisal with their application to support their proposed affordable housing offer and justify the affordable housing tenure mix. At this time, the proposal was to include six homes for affordable rent and 20 for shared-ownership with the inference being that the scheme could not viably support a greater number of rented affordable homes, because the lower revenues that this would generate would adversely affect the overall financial viability required to see the development proceed.

116. The financial viability appraisal submitted as part of the previous application prepared on the

applicant’s behalf was independently assessed on the Council’s behalf by Dixon Searle Partnership (DSP) to undertake a check of, and provide opinion on, the planning applicant’s viability information and stated position.

117. In this case, DSP identified that in strict viability terms, the benchmark land value of £1.5m

used in the applicant’s appraisal would not be an unreasonable assumption to make. At the same time, it should be noted that this application is unusual as the land value used is actually equal to the debts of the football club and that one of the drivers behind the proposal is to help clear the club’s debts and put it on a more sustainable footing. In that sense, the scheme is an “enabling development”, whilst also providing new club facilities and some other local benefits.

118. Following further negotiation and a review of some of the assumptions, the applicant agreed to

alter the proposed affordable tenure mix, such that the number of affordable rented homes increased from six to ten and, with the number of shared-ownership homes dropping from 20 to 16.

119. The same approach has been undertaken for the current application, with 10 affordable rented

homes and 16 shared ownership. This represents a 39:61 split, which does fall below the Council’s requirement, although was previously agreed by the Council’s Housing department and is welcomed and considered to be acceptable with an appropriate provision of 1 and 2 bedroomed units in the current application. A viability assessment is being considered by the Council’s independent viability assessors Dixon Searle Partnership, and the tenure mix can be secured through the Section 106.

120. The applicant has advised that the 24 flats within Building B cannot be delivered viably with a contribution of 40% affordable housing on the site, however Building A would include 10 affordable rented and 16 shared ownership flats, which provides a percentage of 52% of the total units across the site. This approach was agreed for the previous application (ref: 2017/4137) and on balance it was considered that the although the scheme slightly under-delivered in respect of the number of rented affordable homes proposed, this is outweighed by

the over-delivery of affordable homes as a whole, in combination with the increase in the quality of the accommodation provided, and meeting the Council’s identified housing need in respect of unit sizes.

121. This is however, subject to a suitably worded Section 106 agreement being provided, to

ensure that the affordable units are secured. At the time of writing the Unilateral Undertaking has not been provided. Subject to a Unilateral Undertaking being received within three months of the resolution to grant permission, the proposal would comply with the requirements of policy CS21.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

122. The proposed development is liable for CIL, which could be used to secure improvements to

local infrastructure. The applicant has provided the relevant liability forms required to pay the chargeable amount of approximately £585,677.01 (this figure is subject to indexation at the time when commencement notice for the development is submitted) required by the Council’s adopted Charging Schedule.

Matters raised in Representations

123. A number of concerns have been raised into the potential for Anti-Social behaviour to occur given the number of late-night functions that it will potentially hold. Such issues are police matters and not one that is a material planning consideration. In any event it has been recommended that a number of conditions (hours of use and no live music/discos shall take place) have been suggested as part of this report.

124. Legal covenants are not an issue that can be addressed through the planning process and the

applicant would be required to address these matters outside of the planning regime. Should residents believe that there is a covenant that would prevent the development of this site, then a separate legal challenge should be made to the land owners.

125. Noise and disturbance caused during the construction process would be a temporary matter

and is not considered to be a reason to withhold planning permission. 126. Planning is not a precedent led system and any future applications would be assessed on the

merits and material planning consideration for each scheme. 127. The site does not have any wildlife designations, and whilst trees would be removed,

additional planting is proposed and the applicant will need to undertake removal in the appropriate periods to prevent breeding seasons. An Ecological Survey has been submitted identifying that the site has low-ecological value and no ecological constraints exist to the site. Conclusion

128. On the basis of the above, and in light of any other material considerations, the proposal is

considered to have overcome the previous reasons for refusal and would be in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, the recommendation is to grant permission. Recommendation A

Permit subject to receipt of satisfactory legal agreement within 3 months of the Committee resolution or an extended period as agreed with the Head of Planning Services.

Recommendation B

If a satisfactory legal agreement is not completed and received with 3 months of the Committee resolution or an extended period as agreed with the Head of Planning Services, delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning Services to refuse planning permission for the following reason: In the absence of a completed legal agreement to secure the necessary affordable housing provision on site, the proposal would conflict with Policy CS21 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011, the Elmbridge Developer Contributions SPD 2012 and the NPPF.

The proposed development does require a CIL payment of £585,677.01

Recommendation: Permit subject to S106 Agreement Conditions/Reasons

1 TIME LIMIT (FULL APPLICATION)

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

Reason: To comply with Section 51 of Part 4 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following list of approved plans: 1102-601, 1102-602, 1102-603, 1102-604, 1102-605, 1102-606, 1102-607, 1102-608, 1102-609, 1102-610, 1102-611, 1102-612, 1102-613, 1102-614, 1102-615, 1102-616, 1102-617, 1102-618 received on 12/09/2019.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.

3 MATERIALS SAMPLES

No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used on the external faces and roof of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the borough council. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory external appearance is achieved of the development in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the use of satisfactory external materials goes to the heart of the planning permission.

4 OBSCURE GLAZING

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the first floor bathroom and en-suite window(s) on the north-western elevation(s) of Building B of the development hereby permitted shall be glazed with obscure glass that accords with level three obscurity as shown on the Pilkington textured glass privacy levels (other glass suppliers are available) and only openable above a height of 1.7m above the internal floor level of the room to which it serves. The window shall be permanently retained in that condition thereafter.

Reason: To preserve the reasonable privacy of neighbouring residents in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

5 LANDSCAPING SCHEME

Prior to first occupation [being brought into use] written details and plans of the following landscaping works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. This scheme shall include: a) positions, height, species, design, materials and type of boundary treatment(s) including walls and fences, together with the new planting to be carried out; b) hard and soft surfacing materials; Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be maintained.

Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of an appropriate landscape scheme in the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

6 LANDSCAPING IMPLEMENTATION All hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Arboricultural work to existing trees shall be carried out prior to the commencement of any other development, otherwise all remaining landscaping work and new planting shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance to the timetable agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants whether new or retained which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species in the same place.

Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of an appropriate landscape scheme in the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

7 TREE PRE-COMMENCEMENT MEETING

No development including groundworks and demolition shall take place and no equipment, machinery or materials shall be brought onto the site for the purposes of the development until a pre-commencement meeting has been held on site and attended by a suitable qualified arboriculturist, representative from the Local Planning Authority and the site manager/foreman. The site visit is required to ensure operatives are aware of the agreed working procedures and the precise position of the approved tree protection measures or/and that all tree protection measures have been installed in accordance with the approved tree protection plan(s) Proposed Site Layout (Tree Protection) (ref: DPA-69846-02 Rev F by DPA Arboricultural Consultants dated August 2019). To arrange a pre-commencement meeting please email [email protected] with the application reference and contact details.

Reason: To protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality, reduce the risk to protected and retained trees in accordance with the approved details pursuant to section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and in accordance with policies CS14, DM6 of the Councils Core Strategy 2011 and Development Management Plan 2015. This is required to be a pre-commencement condition as the details go to the heart of the planning permission.

8 TREE PROTECTION MEASURES (WITH PRE-COMMENCEMENT MEETING)

After the agreed tree protection measures have been installed in accordance with the approved plans, all tree protection measures shall be maintained for the course of the development works. The development thereafter shall be implemented in strict accordance with the approved details and method statements contained in Arboricultural Report (ref: DPA69846/Molesey Football Club/AIS Rev 6 by DPA Arboricultural Consultants dated August 2019).

Reason: To protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality, reduce the risk to protected and retained trees in accordance with the approved details pursuant to section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and in accordance with policies CS14, DM6 of the Councils Core Strategy 2011 and Development Management Plan 2015.

9 TREE RETENTION

All existing trees, hedges or hedgerows shall be retained, unless shown on the approved drawings as being removed and paragraphs (a) and (b) below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the first occupation of the proposed development.

a) no retained tree, hedge or hedgerow shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars. Any pruning shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998: 2010 (tree work) and in accordance with any approved supplied arboricultural information.

b) if any retained tree, hedge or hedgerow is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree, hedge or hedgerow of similar size and species shall be planted at the same place, in the next available planting season or sooner.

Reason: To protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality, reduce the risk to protected and retained trees in accordance with the approved details pursuant to section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and in accordance with policies CS14, CS15, DM6 of the Councils Core Strategy and Development Management Plan.

10 HOURS OF OPENING (CLUBHOUSE)

The hours of use of the bar and clubhouse shall be restricted to between the hours of 08:00am and 23:00pm daily and all persons shall be off the premises no later than 23:30pm.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of residents in the locality in accordance with Policy DM5 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

11 NO LIVE MUSIC

The clubhouse shall at no time be permitted to play live music or have discos or similar activities at any time.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of residents in the locality in accordance with Policy DM5 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

12 NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, the applicant shall submit a detailed noise impact assessment in writing to the Local Planning Authority assessing the current noise climate and model the likely noise impact of the various activities at The Football Club on nearby residents and, where necessary, propose suitable noise mitigation measures to protect the amenity of local residents. The assessment must be carried out by a qualified acoustic consultant (member of the Institute of Acoustics or Association of Noise Consultants), and agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid adverse impacts on health and quality of life from noise in accordance with paragraph 180 of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Noise Policy Statement for England.

13 MODIFIED ACCESS

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the proposed modified access to Walton Road, and the proposed access to Grange Close has been constructed and provided with visibility zones in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter the visibility zones shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction over 1.05m high.

Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with Policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

14 VEHICLE/CYCLE PARKING

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans for vehicles and cycles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. All cycle parking shall be secure, covered and lit. Thereafter the parking and turning areas shall be retained and maintained for their designated purposes.


15 CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT PLAN

The development shall only be commence in accordance with the approved Construction Transport Management Plan (MFC2 Construction Management Plan received on 12/09/2019). Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction of the development.


16 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGE PROVISION The development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless and until each of the proposed dwelling(s) are provided with a fast charge socket (current minimum requirements - 7 kw Mode 3 with Type 2 connector - 230v AC 32 Amp single phase dedicated supply) in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.


17 SUDS

The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of the design of a surface water drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The design must satisfy the SuDS Hierarchy and be compliant with the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS, NPPF and Ministerial Statement on SuDS. The required drainage details shall include:

a) The results of infiltration testing completed in accordance with BRE Digest: 365 and confirmation of groundwater levels. b) Evidence that the proposed final solution will effectively manage the 1 in 30 & 1 in 100 (+40% allowance for climate change) storm events, during all stages of the development. c) Detailed drainage design drawings and calculations to include: a finalised drainage layout detailing the location of drainage elements, pipe diameters, levels, and long and cross sections of each element including details of any flow restrictions and maintenance/risk reducing features (silt traps, inspection chambers etc.). d) A plan showing exceedance flows (i.e. during rainfall greater than design events or during blockage) and how property on and off site will be protected. e) Details of drainage management responsibilities and maintenance regimes for the drainage system. f) Details of how the drainage system will be protected during construction and how runoff (including any pollutants) from the development site will be managed before the drainage system is operational.

Reason: To ensure the design meets the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS and the final drainage design does not increase flood risk on or off site.

18 DRAINAGE

Prior to the first occupation of the development, a verification report carried out by a qualified drainage engineer must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This must demonstrate that the drainage system has been constructed as per the agreed scheme (or detail any minor variations), provide the details of any management company and state the national grid reference of any key drainage elements (surface water attenuation devices/areas, flow restriction devices and outfalls).

Reason: To ensure the Drainage System is constructed to the National Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS.

19 ENERGY STATEMENT

The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance the Energy Report prepared by Richard Child of AED Design (Ref: 19/2618 ene Rev O, dated September 2019.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out is accordance with CS27 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011.

20 TEMPORARY BUILDING TIME LIMIT

The temporary nursery and associated building shall cease operations on site and be removed and the land made good and restored to its former condition within 18 months of the date of the commencement of demolition of the existing clubhouse.

Reason: the temporary nursery building has been approved on a temporary basis. A permanent permission would be unacceptable because the buildings design and location which would not be in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

21 REFUSE AND RECYCLING STORES

Prior to occupation of the development, the approved refuse and recycling stores shall be implemented as shown on the approved plans and shall only be used for the storage of refuse and recycling bins.

Reason: to ensure adequate refuse and recycling stores are available for occupiers of the site in accordance with policy DM8 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

22 POTENTIAL LAND CONTAMINATION

To ensure the potential for contamination has been investigated and the necessary action taken to make the development site suitable for its proposed use, the following steps must be completed to the satisfaction of the Council. No demolition or construction shall be commenced until step (a) has been completed by a competent person and approved. If part (a) identifies the need for step (b) then this shall also be completed and approved before any demolition or construction commences. Furthermore there shall be no occupation of any part of the site by any end user prior to meeting the terms of this condition in full.

a) Preliminary Investigation of the Site A preliminary investigation shall be carried out by a competent person prior to any site clearance or demolition, to assess the condition of the land to be re-developed, in respect of contamination. The preliminary investigation must, as a minimum, include a desk-based evaluation, site walkover and Conceptual Site Model and may include intrusive investigation. A written report of the investigation shall be submitted to the Council for written approval.

If the Council are satisfied that there is a significant possibility that the site could pose a significant risk to future occupiers under its proposed redevelopment use as a result of contamination, then the following additional steps shall also be carried out. b) Site Investigation, Method Statement and Remediation (i) A written site specific investigation plan using the information obtained from the preliminary investigation, providing details of the investigation for soil, gas and controlled waters where appropriate, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council. (ii) The site investigation shall be undertaken in accordance with the scheme agreed by the Borough Council. The results of the site investigation, a refined conceptual model and a risk assessment of any contamination found shall be submitted in writing to, and approved by, the Council. (iii) A written Method Statement with verification plan, detailing any remediation requirements and how successful implementation of these requirements will be verified shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council. c) Development in accordance with the Method Statement 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 Borough Council. Any post remediation monitoring identified in the Method statement, shall be installed by the developer within the timescales identified in the Method Statement and maintained and operated for as long as identified by the Method Statement.

d) Unsuspected Contamination If, during development, contamination not previously identified, is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and had approved by the Council, a written addendum to the Method Statement detailing how the unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

e) Piling Development approved by this permission shall not commence unless a Foundation Works Risk Assessment for piling foundations (if piling is to be used on site) has been submitted to, and agreed in writing, by the Borough Council. The piling shall be undertaken only in accordance with the method outlined in the approved Foundation Works Risk Assessment.

f) Imported material Clean, uncontaminated rock, soil, brick rubble, crushed concrete or ceramic only shall be permitted as infill material. The developer shall not import any material until a sampling program, including appropriate import criteria for the proposed end use and frequency of sampling, has been submitted in writing, and approved by, the Council. The Developer shall carry out the approved sampling program to check that all imported material conforms to the agreed criteria. Where the permitted end use is residential, the sampling program shall also include samples taken from the imported material after final placement. Written confirmation of the suitability of all imported materials shall be provided to the Council as part of step (g). This shall include both the results of the sampling program and also details of the origin, transport, final deposition and any temporary stockpiling of the imported materials.

g) Completion of Remediation and Verification Report Verification by an independent, competent person must be carried out prior to occupation of any part of the site by any end user. Upon completion of the remediation detailed in the Method Statement, and before occupation of any part of the site by any end user, a written Verification Report shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council providing verification that the required works regarding decontamination and installation of post remediation monitoring, have been carried out in accordance with the agreed Method Statement and any addenda thereto. The verification shall be carried out and reported by an independent, competent person, stating that remediation was carried out in accordance with the approved remediation scheme and that the site is suitable for the permitted end use.

Reason: To avoid adverse effects from pollution on the environment, harm to human health or general amenity, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Informatives

1 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY

The development permitted is subject to a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) liability for which a Liability Notice will be issued as soon as practical after the day on which planning permission first permits development.

To avoid breaching the CIL regulations and the potential financial penalties involved, it is essential a prior commencement notice be submitted. The notice is available at www.planningportal.co.uk/cil

For the avoidance of doubt commencement of demolition of existing structure(s) covering any part of the footprint of the proposed structure(s) would be considered as commencement for the purpose of the CIL regulations.

2 NEW VEHICLE CROSSOVERS AND DROPPED KERBS The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway. The applicant is advised that prior approval must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, or verge to form a vehicle crossover or to install dropped kerbs. Please see www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/road-permits-and-licences/vehicle-crossovers-or-dropped-kerbs.

3 OTHER WORKS TO THE HIGHWAY

The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway or any works that may affect a drainage channel/culvert or water course. The applicant is advised that a permit and, potentially, a Section 278 agreement 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. All works on the highway will require a permit and an application will need to submitted to the County Council's Street Works Team up to 3 months in advance of the intended start date, depending on the scale of the works proposed and the classification of the road. Please see http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/road-permits-andlicences/the-traffic-management-permit-scheme. The applicant is also advised that Consent may be required under Section 23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991. Please see www.surreycc.gov.uk/people-and-community/emergency-planning-and-communitysafety/flooding-advice.

4 MUD/DEBRIS ON THE HIGHWAY

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).

5 DAMAGE TO THE HIGHWAY

Section 59 of the Highways Act permits the Highway Authority to charge developers for damage caused by excessive weight and movements of vehicles to and from a site. The Highway Authority will pass on the cost of any excess repairs compared to normal maintenance costs to the applicant/organisation responsible for the damage.

6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING

It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that the electricity supply is sufficient to meet future demands and that any power balancing technology is in place if required. Please refer to: http://www.beama.org.uk/resourceLibrary/beama-guide-to-electric-vehicle-infrastructure.html for guidance and further information on charging modes and connector types.

7 ORDINARY WATERCOURSE

If proposed site works affect an Ordinary Watercourse, Surrey County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority should be contacted to obtain prior written Consent. More details are available on their website

8 SOURCE PROTECTION ZONE

If proposed works result in infiltration of surface water to ground within a Source Protection Zone the Environment Agency will require proof of surface water treatment to achieve water quality standards.

9 REFUSE ACCESS

If it is the intention for the collection vehicle to enter the development the access road needs to meet the following minimum requirements. - Have suitable foundations and surfaces to withstand the maximum weight of the vehicle (generally 26t GVW, 11 .5t axle loading) - Have heavy-duty manhole covers, gully gratings etc. - Be designed to ensure reasonable convenience for the collection vehicle. - Be a minimum of 4 metres wide. - Be arranged for the collection vehicle to continue in a forward direction. - Offer adequate space for turning

10 BIN STORE

The Design & Access Statement refers to bin collection areas and confirms that separate areas will be allocated for the houses, nursery and club. It is essential that these are designed to ensure that waste from residential and commercial sources always remains segregated.

The developer should refer to our guidance when considering the space which will be allocated for the storage of waste containers in the bin area currently provide enough bin capacity for the amount of flats in the development. Properties will require enough room to house containers for refuse, recycling, and food waste. Where applicable garden waste bins may also be needed.

11 INTERNAL STORAGE All units should have sufficient space in the kitchen to segregate recyclable and non-recyclable waste and store it until it is taken out to the bins.

12 ADVICE TO DEVELOPERS REGARDING CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENTS

Before carrying out any contamination investigation or remediation of a site, the developer is strongly recommended to contact the Environmental Health & Licensing Team for guidance on the requirements for such investigations or remediation. Investigations, in particular, which do not adequately fulfil these recommendations, may result in additional work having to be carried out.

13 ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS (ACMS)

Please be aware that buildings constructed before 2000 may contain asbestos and we would recommend a suitable asbestos survey is undertaken before any redevelopment commences. Where a site has been subject to historical redevelopment, it is possible that asbestos containing materials are also present within the ground at the site.

If materials containing asbestos are present on the site, a written Plan for either removal of the ACMs fr

application no: application type: full case officer: ward: expiry...

Documents