1

SCHEDULE “A1” TO THE AGENDA FOR THE WESTERN PLANNING COMMITTEE

6TH MARCH 2013

Applications subject to public speaking. Background Papers Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report are listed under the “Representations” heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading “Background Papers”. The implications for crime, disorder and community safety have been appraised in the following applications but it is not considered that any consideration of that type arises unless it is specifically referred to in a particular report.

A1 WA/2012/1920 Erection of a dwelling following demolition of stable building at Land at 26 Crooksbury Road, Farnham, GU10 1QE Western Area 06/03/2013

L Hirshorn 22/11/2012

Committee: Meeting Date:

Public Notice Was Public Notice required and posted: NA Grid Reference: E: 487158 N: 147222 Town : Farnham Ward : Farnham Moor Park Case Officer: Tim Bryson

8 Week Expiry Date 17/01/2013

Neighbour Notification Expiry Date 04/01/2013

RECOMMENDATION That, subject to the receipt of a suitably completed unilateral undertaking relating to PIC and a legal agreement in respect of SPA within 1 month of the date of the meeting, permission be GRANTED

2

Location Plan

Ariel Photograph

3

Site Description The 0.4 hectare site (excluding access drive) is located on the south western side of Crooksbury Road in Farnham and is accessed via a private driveway serving Brookley Lodge (26 Crooksbury Road). The site (a paddock) comprises a stable building / log store, which is associated with Brookley Lodge. It is considered that the application site does not form part of Brookley Lodge’s residential curtilage. Brookley Lodge is a detached two-storey dwelling. The site is well wooded to the rear and is relatively well screened by mature trees and hedging along all boundaries. The site surroundings consist of other low density residential plots. The site surroundings consist of other residential plots to the north-west, north-east and south-east. To the west of the site lies open fields. Proposal Permission is sought for the erection of a detached two-storey dwelling with associated parking area and amenity area following the demolition of the existing stable building / log store. The proposal would include the provision of a basement and would make use of roof void for habitable accommodation. The proposed dwelling would comprise 6 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and 1 en-suite bathroom. Other accommodation proposed includes an integral garage, utility room, kitchen, study, dining room, living room, games room, boiler room, home gym and home cinema room. The proposed dwelling would have following maximum dimensions (width, depth, height, foot print and floor area): 16.5m, 16.25m, 9.1m, 196.0sqm and 572.0sqm Access to and from the site would be achieved from the existing access drive from Crooksbury Road serving Brookley Lodge. Acoustic fencing is proposed to be erected along both sides of the existing access drive. The proposed dwelling would be positioned to the north-east of Brookley Lodge.

4

Proposed Site Plan

Detailed Site Plan

Existing stable building to be demolished Proposed dwelling

5

Proposed elevations

Proposed Basement and Loft Floorplans

6

Proposed Ground and First Floorplans

Relevant Planning History

WA/2011/1212 Erection of a new dwelling (revision of WA/2010/2073)

Refused 05/09/2011 Appeal Allowed 31/05/2012 (extant)

WA/2010/2073 Erection of dwelling Refused 25/01/2011

WA/2008/0422 Outline application for the erection of a new dwelling.

Refused 06/05/2008

WA84/1475 Outline application for the erection of 1 dwelling

Refused 31/10/1984 Appeal Dismissed 16/09/1985

WA79/1437 Erection of one detached house with separate garage ( outline )

Refused 31/10/1979

FAR53/73 Outline erection of detached dwelling and garage on approx. 0.34 ha (0.85 acres) on land at rear

Refused 27/03/1973 Dismissed 10/07/1974

Planning Policy Constraints Developed Area of Farnham South Farnham Area of Special Environmental Quality (ASEQ) Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV) Wealden Heaths I SPA 5km Buffer Zone Thames Basin Heathland SPA 5km Buffer Zone Site adjacent to Countryside beyond the Green Belt

7

Development Plan Policies and Proposals Policies D1, D3, D4, D5, D7, D8, D9, D13, D14, C3, H10, BE3, M2 and M14 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 Policies CC1, CC2, CC3, CC4, CC6, T4, NRM5, NRM6 and C4 of the South East Plan 2009 (subject to the letter to Chief Planning Officers from the Secretary of State dated 27/5/10 regarding abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies). The South East Plan 2009 is the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South East region. Although the Localism Act makes provision for the abolition of regional strategies, until they are formally abolished by Order, they remain part of the development plan. It has been held that the Government’s intention to abolish regional plans could be a material consideration in making development control decisions. The amount of weight that can be attached to this intention is a matter of judgment, given that there are still some matters to be resolved before the Government can initiate the formal process of abolition. Policies CS1, CS16, CS18 of the Local Development Framework pre-submission Core Strategy 2012 The Council is preparing its Core Strategy setting out the key strategic planning policies for the area up to 2028. The Council agreed the proposed pre-submission version of the Core Strategy at its meeting on 17th July 2012 and it was published for consultation on 16th August 2012. The Council approved the Core Strategy for submission on 22nd January 2013 and it was formally submitted for Examination on 31st January 2013. As it stands only limited weight can be given to the emerging Core Strategy. However, this will increase as the Core Strategy progresses through Examination. The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF) The Farnham Design Statement 2010 The Planning Infrastructure Contributions SPD 2008 SCC Vehicular and Cycle Parking Guidance 2012 WBC Draft Parking Guidelines 2012 Consultations and Town Council Comments County Highway Authority: No objection. The County Highway Authority has undertaken an assessment in terms of the likely net additional traffic generation, access arrangements and parking provision and is satisfied that the application would not have a material impact on the safety and operation of the adjoining public highway. The County Highway Authority therefore has no highway requirements.

8

Natural England: Provided the applicant is taking steps to put a new Section 106 agreement in place then Natural England has no further comment to make. Farnham Town Council: Strongly object. The proposed application is against the Farnham Design Statement. This is in an area of outstanding natural beauty and on the border of the Surrey Hills. Representations 8 letters have been received raising objection on the following grounds:

The proposed changes will significantly increase the size of the dwelling and significantly increase the height of the upper windows which look out over neighbouring properties;

Cellars are un-characteristic of this area and would be a massive engineering project;

Noise, dust and vibration would impact severely on enjoyment of property;

Dormer window will overlook property and the loft room will increase the loss of light to garden;

The original application was rejected by the local community and refused by Waverley Borough Council;

This was a Greenfield site and whilst the integrity can no longer be preserved as such, the current application for a very large dwelling upon it significantly changes the character of the neighbourhood;

Access to the site is poor and the proposal will result in vehicles reversing onto Crooksbury Road;

Proposal could set a precedent to development of other sites;

The addition of rooflights would increase overlooking and further impede on privacy and cause an eyesore when the lights are on;

The proposal will increase traffic, noise, light disruption and disturbance in comparison to the previous allowed scheme;

The cellar would damage roots of trees and affect land;

The proposal will overshadow neighbouring gardens; Submissions in support In support of the application, the applicant has made the following points:

The current proposal is for the same as approved under WA/2011/1212, with the provision of additional accommodation through the provision of a basement and use of the roof space.

The external design of the proposed dwelling would be the same as the extant scheme, with exception of additional rooflights and external staircase to basement.

Since the last application, the Government has published the National Planning Policy Framework. This document states there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which this development is.

9

The proposal is considered compliant with Policies D1, D4 and BE3

The Inspector for the last planning application considered the proposal to accord with the relevant policies of the Local Plan. This application is not materially different to that proposal in respect to these policies.

The proposal accords with Government advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and the policies of the Development Plan. The scheme will result in a positive enhancement to the built form of Farnham and should be supported by the Local Planning Authority.

Determining Issues

Principle of development

Planning history and differences with previous proposal

Impact on visual amenity

Impact on residential amenity

Effect upon the SPAs

Impact on trees

Planning Infrastructure Contributions

Highway Issues

Crime and disorder

Financial considerations

Climate change and sustainability

Biodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010

Water Frameworks Regulations 2011

Accessibility and Equalities Act 2010 Implications

Human Rights Implications

Environmental Impact Regulations 2011

Third party representations

Article 2(3) Development Management Procedure (Amendment) Order 2012 Working in a positive/proactive manner

Planning Considerations Principle of development The site is located within a Developed Area of Special Environmental Quality; the Council will seek to preserve the semi-rural character of these areas. The site is within the Wealden Heaths Special Protection Area Buffer Zone. Development should not result in an effect upon the integrity of the SPA. The site is within the Thames Basin Heathland Special Protection Area Buffer Zone. Development should not result in an effect upon the integrity of the SPA. The site is within the designated AGLV; strong protection will be given to ensure the conservation and enhancement of the landscape character and natural beauty.

10

It is noted that the south western boundary of the application site adjoins the Countryside beyond the Green Belt as defined by the Waverley Borough Local 2002. The site benefits from an extant planning permission (WA/2011/1212) for a detached dwelling. This was allowed on appeal on 31/05/2012. This is a highly material consideration in the assessment of the current planning application. The Inspectors decision letter is attached at Annexe 1. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012 and therefore is a material consideration in the assessment of applications. With reference to Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) and paragraph 12 of the NPPF, the development plan is the starting point for decision making. At the heart of the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Paragraph 14 goes on to state that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, planning permission shall be granted unless any adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in this framework taken as a whole. Paragraphs 214 and 215 of the NPPF state that for 12 months from the day of publication, decision takers may continue to give full weight to relevant policies adopted since 2004 even if there is a limited degree of conflict with this Framework. In other cases and following this 12 month period, due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the framework, the greater the weight that may be given). The relevant Local Plan policies are considered to fall in line with the NPPF in this instance. The Council’s emerging Core Strategy was formally submitted for Examination on 31st January 2013. As it stands only limited weight can be given to the emerging Core Strategy. However, this will increase as the Core Strategy progresses through Examination. In the current case, emerging Policy CS16 of this document is considered relevant and sets out a requirement for new development to have a high standard of design, taking into account adopted design guidance. Planning history and differences with previous proposal The current proposal is for the same development as previously allowed on appeal under planning application WA/2011/1212 with some differences. The differences are as follows:

11

The proposed use of the roof space for habitable accommodation, including insertion of two pairs of rooflights in the rear elevation and one pair of rooflights in the front elevation;

The provision of a basement (164 sq m) for habitable accommodation, including provision of external stairs to the basement on the south-east elevation and insertion of ground lightwells on the north-west and north-east elevations to serve the basement.

Re-positioning of ground floor door and window on south-east elevation The overall height, width, depth, design and position of the proposed dwelling would be the same as the previously allowed scheme under WA/2011/1212. Proposed elevations of extant scheme WA/2011/1212

The test for Members is whether the differences between the current proposal and the extant scheme are materially harmful and whether it is acceptable in its own right. The previous allowed scheme was not considered to be harmful by the Inspector. Impact on visual amenity In allowing the appeal under WA/2011/1212 the Inspector concluded that although the proposed dwelling would alter the character of the site, the development would reflect the scale and density of the properties in the immediate area and the separation distances between the proposed and existing dwellings would complement the overall pattern of development. The Inspector further outlines that the spacious feel to the area would not be lost, its wooded character would be retained and on balance the development would not significantly alter the semi-rural character of the area.

12

As indicated above, the test for the current application is whether the changes now proposed, in comparison with the appeal scheme, would result in a more harmful form of development. The proposed additional rooflights would be of the same scale and design as those allowed on the south-east elevation of the extant scheme. Officers consider the additional rooflights are of a scale that are suitable to the proposed dwelling and would not be an unduly intrusive form of development in the front and rear roof elevations. The two lightwells would be set flush with the ground level surrounding the dwelling and would not have any harmful visual impact on the site or surrounding area. The external staircase to serve the basement would be on the south-east elevation where beyond lies the south-east boundary treatment of dense vegetation. The only visible section of the external staircase would be the hand rail. Officers consider this would not have a harmful impact on the character of the site or surrounding area. In comparison to the extant scheme, the overall size and scale of the proposed dwelling above ground would be the same. The site lies within the designated developed area of Farnham where there is no objection in principle to the provision of a basement. It is considered there would be no material impact from the basement on the surrounding area as it would be confined to within the footprint of the host dwelling. The site lies within the very northern part of the Moor Park area of Farnham. The design guidelines for the Moor Park area under the Farnham Design Statement seek the retention of the spacious character of the area. The proposal would result in an additional dwelling on a plot that is in-keeping with the scale of surrounding residential plots. The key characteristics of the area would not be harmed by the proposal and it is considered to comply with the Farnham Design Statement. In allowing the appeal, the Inspector considered that the proposal would reflect the scale and density of the properties in the immediate area. Officers have assessed the material changes and although the habitable accommodation would be increased, the visual differences are considered to be minimal and would not lead officers to a different conclusion. The proposal is considered to comply with the Farnham Design Statement. As mentioned above the site is located within the South Farnham Area of Special Environmental Quality. New development for housing will not be allowed within the South Farnham Area of Special Environmental Quality if the Council believe that the development would: -

a) Lead to an erosion of its semi-rural character, b) Be out of keeping with the scale, pattern and density of the surrounding

development, c) Detract from the well wooded appearance of the area,

13

d) Lead to pressure for the fragmentation of other development, e) Result in the loss of the hedges or walls

The previous allowed appeal was considered by the Inspector to comply with Policies D1, D4, BE3 and C3 of the Local Plan, Policy CC6 of the South East Plan 2009 and the Farnham Design Statement 2010. Having regard to the differences between the current proposal and the extant scheme, officers do not raise objection to the visual impact of the proposal and is considered to comply with the above policies. The current proposal would not have a greater material impact on the landscape than the extant scheme. Impact on residential amenity The Inspector considered the use of acoustic fencing along both sides of the shared driveway access would reduce the effect of noise from vehicles to and from the proposed dwelling. No objection was made in regard to noise and disturbance to neighbouring occupiers by the Inspector. The current proposal includes the provision of acoustic fencing in the same position as that under the extant scheme. The likely effect of vehicle noise from one additional dwelling utilising the shared driveway access would be minimal. The provision of acoustic fencing would ensure that any noise generated would be satisfactorily mitigated. The position of the proposed welling would be the same as that under the extant scheme. The height, width, depth and design would also be the same as the extant scheme. Officers are therefore satisfied that the position and scale of the proposal would not be overbearing to or lead to a loss of daylight or sunlight received to neighbouring plots. The proposed ground floor lightwells would be positioned flush with external ground floor level. Given the limited visibility of these proposed lightwells and distances to neighbouring boundaries, officers are satisfied the lightwells would not have any harm on surrounding neighbouring amenities. The proposed rooflights on the front roof elevation would face toward the rear plot of number 24 Crooksbury Road. The additional rooflights on the front elevation would increase the level of surveillance from the front elevation of the proposed dwelling. The distance from the proposed rooflight would be 24 m from the west boundary of number 24. The combination of this distance and tree cover along the north-east boundary satisfies officers that the additional rooflights would not cause material harm by either overlooking or through disturbance from light pollution to the occupiers of number 24. The two pairs of rooflights proposed on the rear roof elevation would face directly over the site. The position of these rooflights are at an oblique angle from the rear gardens serving neighbouring properties Woodside and Meadow Lea. Officers are satisfied the oblique angle and boundary treatment would not lead to any overlooking or disturbance through light pollution from these rear rooflights to these neighbouring occupiers.

14

Overall, the material differences between the current proposal and the extant scheme are such that they do not result in materially more harmful development or one that would cause material harm to surrounding neighbouring occupiers. The proposal is considered to comply with Policies D1 and D4 in this regard. Effect upon the SPA The site is located within the 5km of the Thames Basin Heathland Special Protection Area (SPA). The proposal comprises the creation of a 6 bed residential property and would result in an increase in people (permanently) on the site. The three tests as set out in Regulation 122(2) require S106 agreements to be: (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. In order for the development to be acceptable in planning terms, a S106 agreement is required as part of any subsequent planning approval to secure a financial contribution (£4,590.90) towards a SANG, in line with the Waverley Borough Council Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBH SPA) Avoidance Strategy (December 2009). This Strategy was formally adopted by the Council on 13th December 2009. In line with this strategy and the requirements of Regulation 48 of the Habitats Regulations, a unilateral undertaking is required to ensure that the additional residential unit proposed by this development will not have any likely significant effect on the TBH SPA. The level of financial contribution sought is required to be in line with the specific tariffs set out in the adopted Avoidance Strategy, which relate to the number of residential units and number of bedrooms proposed. At the time of writing the report, an appropriate legal agreement had not been submitted and executed with the Council. Thus, if permission is granted, the decision should be subject to the completion of an appropriate legal agreement within 1 month of the Committee meeting. Impact on trees The application proposes to remove one tree. This tree is one of a linear group of Douglas Fir trees along the southern boundary. The Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has not raised objection to the removal of this tree and would not be detrimental to the landscape. The applicants have submitted a Tree Survey and Aboricultural Report with the planning application. The Aboricultural Report concludes that all retained trees on the site could be adequately protected during construction phase of proposed works and that the proposed dwelling would be positioned in a

15

satisfactory relationship to retained trees. In allowing the appeal under the extant scheme, the Inspector did not raise objection to the relationship of the proposed dwelling to trees. The current proposal would include excavation to form the basement to the proposed dwelling. The Tree and Landscape Officer has taken this into consideration and the basement provision would not have any additional implications for the trees. The proposal would not cause any harm to trees on or adjacent to the site and therefore, subject to suitable tree protection conditions, officers raise no objection to the proposal in regard to the impact on trees. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy D7 of the Local Plan. Planning Infrastructure Contributions Policy D13 of the Local Plan states that the Council will have regard to the cumulative impact of development, and developers may be required to contribute jointly to necessary infrastructure improvements. Local Plan Policy D14 goes on to set out the principles behind the negotiation of planning obligations required in connection with particular forms of new development. These have now been superseded to a certain extent by paragraphs 203-205 of the NPPF and the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.

In order to provide certainty to developers and to ensure the impact on local services and infrastructure from additional people living in the Borough is mitigated the Council has adopted a standardised charging system for new development. This Planning Infrastructure Contribution (PIC) is a tariff based approach that is proportionate to the size and scale of development being proposed.

The current tests for legal agreements are set out in Regulation 122 (2) of the CIL Regulations 2010 and the guidance within the NPPF.

The three tests as set out in Regulation 122(2) require s106 agreements to be:

- Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

- Directly related to the development; and

- Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The Council adopted a SPD on Infrastructure Contributions in April 2008. The policy requires developments which result in a net increase in dwellings to contribute towards infrastructure improvements in the borough.

As the proposal would involve new residential development, an appropriate financial contribution would therefore be required.

The application comprises the creation of a 6 bed residential property; therefore a contribution of £20,573.37 is required in accordance with the

16

Council’s Planning Infrastructure Contribution SPD (adopted April 2008) and Local Plan Policies D13 and D14. The relevant S106 Agreement has not been completed to secure the infrastructure contribution. The recommendation will therefore require the submission of a legal agreement within 1 month of the Committee meeting, should permission be granted.

Highway and Parking Issues

On highways, paragraphs 29 to 41 of the NPPF refer to promoting sustainable transport. They effectively supersede the policy previously contained in PPG13 on ‘Transport.’ Paragraph 29 of the NPPF states that transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development and that the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. Paragraph 30 states that encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce pollution. Paragraph 32 goes on to state that decisions should take account of whether:

- The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up, depending upon the nature and location of the site to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;

- Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development The County Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposed development on highway safety grounds. The County Highway Authority has stated that there is adequate visibility at the existing access to accommodate traffic from one extra dwelling. The Highway Authority position has not altered since the previously allowed proposal. The proposal includes the provision of one integral garage and a large area of hardstanding in front of the dwelling. The level of parking provision provided is compliant with the County Council and Borough Council parking guidance. The proposal would not prejudice highway safety and provide appropriate levels of parking and is therefore compliant with Policies M2 and M14 of the Local Plan. The previous scheme allowed on appeal was acceptable on highways and parking grounds. No new material considerations or changes to the scheme suggest that a different view should now be taken. Crime and disorder S17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a duty to consider crime and disorder implications on local authorities. In exercising its various functions, each authority should have due regard to the likely effect of those functions on, and the need to do all that it can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This requirement is reflected in the National Planning Policy

17

Framework, which states that planning policies and decisions should promote safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion. Given the scale and nature of the proposal, together with its location surrounded by other residential plots, it is considered that the proposed dwelling would not lead to crime and disorder in the local community and would accord with the requirements of the NPPF. Officers consider that the proposal would increase the level of surveillance to the surrounding area which would likely lead to crime deterrent. Financial Considerations 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 Committee. 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 (NHB) is capable of being a material consideration where relevant. In the current case, the approval of the application would mean that the NHB would be payable for the net increase in one dwelling from this development. The Head of Finance has calculated the indicative figure of £1,450 per net additional dwelling, (total of £1,450) per annum for six years. Climate change and sustainability The Local Plan does not require this type of development to achieve a particular rating of the Code for Sustainable Homes or include renewable energy technologies. This said, the applicant has indicated as part of their Design and Access Statement that the new building will be built to modern standards and be more energy efficient and better for the environment than the existing building. The lack of any policy backing in this regard, however, prevents conditions being added to require this. Biodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010 The NPPF states that the Planning System should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts upon biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures. When determining planning application, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:

18

If significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for then planning permission should be refused. In addition, Circular 06/2005 states ‘It is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established before planning permission is granted.’ The application property does not fall within a designated SPA, SAC, SNCI or SSSI. It is not within 200m of ancient woodland or water. As such it is considered that a biodiversity survey is not required in this instance. Water Frameworks Regulations 2011 The proposal is not considered to have any implications for the Water Framework Regulations. Accessibility and Equalities Act 2010 Implications Policy D9 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 encourages and seeks provision for accessibility for everyone, including people with disabilities, to new development involving buildings or spaces to which the public have access. Officers consider the proposal complies with this policy. A full assessment against the relevant Building Regulations would be captured under a separate assessment should permission be granted. From the 1st October 2010, the Equality Act replaced most of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). The Equality Act 2010 aims to protect disabled people and prevent disability discrimination. Officers consider the proposal would not discriminate against disability, with particular regard to access. It is considered that there would be no equalities impact arising from the proposal. Human Rights Implications It is considered that there would be no human rights implications arising from the proposal. Environmental Impact Regulations 2011 The proposal is not considered to be EIA development under either Schedule 1 or 2 of the EIA Impact Regulations 2011 or a variation/amendment of a previous EIA development nor taken in conjunction with other development that is likely to have a significant environmental effect. Third party representations A number of objections to the proposal have been raised from third parties, including the Farnham Town Council and Crooksbury Residents Association. The site has an extant planning permission for a new dwelling. This is a highly

19

material consideration. The key differences between the current proposal and the extant scheme have been set out in the report. The site benefits from good screening to boundaries and the proposed dwelling would maintain good separation distances to neighbouring plots. The addition of rooflights and basement accommodation would not cause material harm to any neighbouring occupier. The provision of a basement would require a more significant engineering operation on site. Officers acknowledge that during the construction process there could be some disturbance from noise to surrounding occupiers. Construction activity is transient and its effect would not justify a reason for refusal. However, officers consider that a condition restricting the hours of operation for the construction phase would be appropriate, given the level of proposed development and its proximity to nearby neighbouring occupiers. The Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer is satisfied that the level of engineering operation required for the proposed basement would not result in damage to any surrounding trees or their roots. Although the Council refused the previous application WA/2011/1212, it was allowed on appeal, and therefore the site benefits from an extant planning permission. The key consideration in the assessment of the current proposal is whether the material differences between the current proposal and the extant permission are acceptable, having regard to material considerations. In the current case, the material differences are considered acceptable and would not result in harm to surrounding occupiers or detract from the character of the area. Article 2(3) Development Management Procedure (Amendment) Order 2012 Working in a positive/proactive manner In assessing this application, officers have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner consistent with the requirements of paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF. This included 1 or more of the following:-

Provided feedback through the validation process including information on the website, to correct identified problems to ensure that the application was correct and could be registered;

Have proactively communicated with the applicant through the process to advise progress, timescales or recommendation.

Conclusion The proposal is effectively for the same development as that allowed under the extant scheme. The additional basement would remain within the footprint of the dwelling and would not lead to a harmful effect on surrounding trees to the site. The use of the roof space for habitable accommodation and insertion of rooflights would not have a harmful visual effect on the character of the surrounding area or materially harm surrounding neighbouring occupiers.

20

Having regard to the extant scheme, officers consider the material changes in the current proposal are acceptable in planning terms and therefore the proposal could be supported. Recommendation A That, subject to the receipt of a suitably completed unilateral undertaking relating to PIC and a legal agreement in respect of SPA within 1 month of the date of the meeting, permission be GRANTED:

1. Condition No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces and hard surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows or other openings other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed in the north-west or south-east elevations of the dwelling hereby permitted without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority. Reason In the interest of the protection of neighbouring amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

3. Condition Before any work on site begins, cross sections/details indicating the proposed finished ground levels surrounding the building shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details. Reason In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. Condition Prior to the commencement of any development hereby permitted detailed drawings of any walls, fences or other means of enclosure within or around the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The design of any wall, fence or other means of enclosure must be

21

permeable to flood water. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained. Reason In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

5. Condition Prior to the commencement of development and before any alteration of the existing condition of the site takes place, a pre-commencement meeting will be held with the Local Planning Authority Tree Officer to agree on-site protection measures in accordance with BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations and sequencing of works and tree protection measures in accordance with the submitted tree protection plan 1467/06 Rev C. Such fencing and ground protection measures shall remain in place throughout the duration of the development to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the relevant phases of construction. Reason To safeguard the retained trees in the interests of the visual amenity and character of the area, in accordance with Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

6. Condition Before work begins, cross sections/details indicating the proposed finished ground levels and 'no dig' driveway, surface materials including sub-base and depth of construction and method/materials used for edging, within protected zone around retained trees shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason To safeguard the retained trees in the interests of the visual amenity and character of the area, in accordance with Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

7. Condition Prior to commencement of any works on site, details of any services to be provided or repaired including drains and soakaways, on or to the site, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and shall be carried out as shown. No services shall be routed within the root protection areas of retained trees. Reason To safeguard the retained trees in the interests of the visual amenity and character of the area, in accordance with Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

22

8. Condition No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscaping, including any external lighting, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details and shall be carried out within the first planting season after commencement of the development or as otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years after planting, such maintenance to include the replacement of any trees and shrubs that die or have otherwise become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective. Such replacements to be of same species and size as those originally planted. Reason In the interest of the character and amenity of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

9. Condition Before any work on site begins, cross sections/details indicating the proposed finished basement level for the building shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details. Reason In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

10. Condition No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local lanning Authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998:2010 (Tree Work - Recommendations). If any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason In the interest of the character and amenity of the area in accordance with Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

11. Condition The basement hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for the purposes ancillary to the host dwelling as a single family dwelling.

23

Reason In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

12. Condition Hours of construction, including deliveries to and from the site shall be limited to 0730-1800 Monday to Friday; 0800-1300 on Saturdays and no work on Sundays and Bank or Public Holidays. Reason In the interest of the protection of nearby neighbouring occupiers, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

13. Condition The plan numbers to which this permission relates are Location Plan 1:1250, 1467/07 Revision A, 1467/09 Revision A, 1467/08 Revision A, 1467/11, 1467/02 Revision A, 1467/06 Revision C, 7226/01. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. No material variation from these plans shall take place unless otherwise first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason In order that the development hereby permitted shall be fully implemented in complete accordance with the approved plans and to accord with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION The development hereby granted has been assessed against the following Development Plan policies: Policies D1, D3, D4, D5, D7, D8, D9, D13, D14, C3, H10, BE3, M2 and M14 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002, Policies CC1, CC2, CC3, CC4, CC6, T4, NRM5, NRM6 and C4 of the South East Plan 2009 (subject to the letter to Chief Planning Officers from the Secretary of State dated 27/05/10 regarding abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies), Policies CS1, CS16, CS18 of the Local Development Framework pre-submission Core Strategy 2012, the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and material considerations, including third party representations. The proposed dwelling would be of the same height, depth, width, design and position on site as the extant scheme. The proposed basement would remain within the footprint of the proposed dwelling. The visual impact of the proposed basement would be limited to one set of external stairs and lightwells, which would be set at ground level. The additional rooflights hereby approved are of a suitable scale and design to the host dwelling. The proposal would therefore have limited visual variance from the extant scheme and would not be visually harmful in the AGLV or surrounding area. The distance from the proposal to surrounding neighbouring plots is acceptable in planning terms and that there would not be any material harm. The proposal would not have a material impact on the character and appearance of the adjacent countryside. The proposal would not cause harm to trees on site and suitable conditions have been imposed that would ensure the protection and retention

24

of trees to be retained. The recommendation ensures that the proposal would mitigate the impact on local infrastructure and that there would not be a significant effect upon the integrity of the Thames Basin Heaths SPA. The proposal would not lead to undue pressure on the public highway. The material differences between the current proposal and the extant scheme would not result in any harm that would justify refusal of the application. Other material considerations, including third party representations have been assessed, it has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest. Informatives

1. ''IMPORTANT'' This planning permission contains certain conditions precedent that state 'before development commences' or 'prior to commencement of any development' (or similar). As a result these must be discharged prior to ANY development activity taking place on site. Commencement of development without having complied with these conditions will make any development unauthorised and possibly subject to enforcement action such as a Stop Notice. If the conditions have not been subsequently satisfactorily discharged within the time allowed to implement the permission then the development will remain unauthorised.

2. There is a fee for requests to discharge a condition on a planning consent. The fee payable is £97.00 or a reduced rate of £28.00 for household applications. The fee is charged per written request not per condition to be discharged. A Conditions Discharge form is available and can be downloaded from our web site. Please note that the fee is refundable if the Local Planning Authority concerned has failed to discharge the condition by 12 weeks after receipt of the required information.

3. The planning permission hereby granted followed the completion of a related Planning Obligation (either a Unilateral Undertaking or a Legal Agreement) under S.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act (as amended).

4. The Council confirms that in assessing this planning application it has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive way, in line with the requirements of paragraph 186-187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012. Recommendation B That, in the event that the requirements of Recommendation A are not met, the Head of Planning be authorised to REFUSE permission for the following reasons:

1. The applicant has failed to comply with the Waverley Borough Council Infrastructure Contribution SPD (April 2008) and therefore the proposal

25

conflicts with Policy CC7 of the South East Plan 2009 and Policies D13 and D14 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposals (in combination with other projects) would have a likely adverse effect on the integrity of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA) in that it is now widely recognised that increasing urbanisation of the area around the SPA has a continuing adverse effect on its interest features, namely Nightjar, Woodlark and Dartford Warbler, the three internationally rare bird species for which it is classified. Accordingly, since the planning authority is not satisfied that Regulation 62 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (The Habitats Regulations) applies in this case, it must refuse permission in accordance with Regulation 61(5) of the Habitats Regulations and Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EE. The proposal conflicts with Policy NRM6 of the South East Plan and the NPPF 2012.

26