type: full wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21491/plng app 2017... · 2018-11-19 · 1 and 2...

Application No: 2017/1681 Application Type:

FULL

Case Officer: Peter Brooks Ward: Weybridge Riverside Ward

Expiry Date: 14/08/2017

Location: Locke King House 2 Balfour Road Weybridge Surrey KT13 8HD Proposal: Detached two-storey building with rooms in the roofspace and dormer

windows to provide 10 flats with associated basement parking, landscaping, new access and entrance gates and piers (a maximum of 2m high) following demolition of existing Office building (B1) (514.6 sqm)

Applicant: LKH Properties Ltd Agent: Mr Andrew Bandosz

D&M Planning Ltd Unit 23 Woodside Park Catteshall Lane Godalming GU7 1LG

Decision Level: If Permit – Planning Committee If Refuse – Planning Committee

Recommendation: Permit

At the meeting of the South Area Planning Sub Committee on 05 November 2018 it was recommended that permission be granted subject to those conditions recommended by Officers. However, in accordance with part 4-5 of the Council’s Constitution, two Members of the Planning Committee (Mr. M. Freeman and Mr. A. Burley) that were present for the complete consideration of the application, requested that this application be referred to the Planning Committee for determination. Late letters were received in regard to this application and the update listing these is repeated below:

2 late letters received (including 1 from the Weybridge Society) raising the following points: Proposed mass, bulk, size and appearance harmful to the streetscene. Host building should be preserved. Development would set worrying precedent in the Conservation Area. Officer’s comment: Comments noted and are addressed within the Officers report. Development would adversely impact upon neighbouring amenity and conflict with guidance. Officer’s comment: The impacts on neighbouring amenity have been addressed in the Officers report. This application has not overcome those reasons for refusal of application 2015/2684. Officer’s comment: The current scheme is different to that previously refused. That scheme was of a different design and scale and it is considered this scheme to be acceptable. The planning agent has identified some points in the report which they wished to be clarified/amended: - At para 46 the Officers report states that 20 basement car parking spaces are provided, but does not state that 4 no. above ground spaces for visitors/deliveries are also proposed.

- Bullet point 9 of the letters of representation summary should read ‘Heritage assets’. Para 1 should read ‘a detached two storey building’.

The original report to Sub-Committee is set out below.

Representations: 41 letters of objection from 23 addresses (1 from outside the borough) including from the Weybridge Society raising the following points:

Size, mass and height of building out of character in conservation area Raised design of building out of keeping Proposal dominant on the site and within wider area Adverse impact on conservation area and listed buildings Increase in parking pressure in the area Adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity Insufficient infrastructure to support occupants Lack of parking Loss of herniate asset Adverse impact to highway safety Underground parking liable to flooding Overdevelopment Reasons for refusal of previous application not been overcome Georgian design out of keeping in this location Revised plans do not overcome initial concerns identified Errors with the submitted plans and neighbour notification Building would appear cramped on the site

***This application qualifies for public speaking***

This application has been promoted by Cllr Davis if the recommendation is to permit and by Cllr Freeman if the recommendation is to refuse

R e p o r t Description

1. The application site comprises a detached two building (a significant unlisted building) located to the east of the junction of Balfour Road and Devonshire Road in Weybridge. The site is located within the Conservation Area and adjoins Listed Buildings. Th northern part of the site is currently used for car parking, with the existing building occupying the southern part of the site, ad fronts Balfour Road. the wider area has a mixed character, with the Conservation Area spreading east and south of the site, with newer developments to the west.

2. The application building was originally opened as a Cottage Hospital in July 1889, funded by

public subscription, but has been subsequently refurbished and converted into office use. It is a brick Arts and Crafts style building, which makes a positive contribution to the street scene and has been identified as a Significant Unlisted Building in the character appraisal carried out for the conservation area which was endorsed in December 2006.

Constraints

3. The relevant planning constraints are:

Conservation Area Adjoining Listed Building Significant Unlisted Building District Centre (Weybridge Town Centre) Potential Contaminated Land Area of High Archaeological Potential

Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) 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 CS4 – Weybridge CS17 – Local Character, Density and Design CS18 – Town Centre uses CS19 – Housing type and size CS21 – Affordable Housing CS23 – Employment Land Provision CS25 – Travel and Accessibility

Development Management Plan 2015 DM1 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development DM2 – Design and amenity DM5 – Pollution DM6 – Landscape and trees DM7 – Access and parking DM8 – Refuse, recycling and external plant DM10 – Housing DM11 – Employment DM12 – Heritage DM21 – Nature conservation and biodiversity

Design & Character SPD 2012 & Companion Guide: Weybridge Developers Contributions SPD 2012

5. Relevant Planning History

Proposal

6. Permission is sought for the erection of a detached two-storey building with rooms in the

roofspace and dormer windows to provide 10 flats with associated basement parking, landscaping, new access and entrance gates and piers (a maximum of 2m high) following demolition of existing Office building (B1) (514.6 sqm).

7. During the applicant the design of the building was amended to address concerns of the Councils Listed Building Advisor and Conservation Officer, and also to the basement to amend the refuse storage area. Consultations

Reference Description Decision 2015/2684 Detached two storey building with rooms in

the roof space and dormer windows to provide 18 retirement flats, including communal areas, basement parking and landscaping following demolition of existing B1 Office building (514.6 sq m)

Refused

8. Environmental Health (Noise & Pollution) – No objections subject to informative in relation to hours of working during construction.

9. Environmental Heath (Contaminated Land) – No objections subject to condition in relation to potential land contamination.

10. Environmental Health (Refuse) – Raises no objections.

11. Listed Building Advisor – Initially raised objections to the proposal as it would not preserve or enhance the conservation area or the setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Following receipt of amended plans now raises no objections to the proposal and considers it would preserve the character of the conservation area and adjacent listed buildings.

12. Conservation Officer – Initially raised objections to the loss of the Significant Unlisted Building and the impact upon the conservation area. Following receipt of amended plans concluded that the current proposal would have comparatively less impact on the setting of adjacent listed buildings, she does not consider that it would make a sufficiently positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area to justify replacing the existing building.

13. Weybridge Conservation Area Advisory Committee – Raised objections to the submitted application on ground of loss of the Significant Unlisted Building and impacts on the local heritage assets. Following receipt of amended plans they maintain their objection concluding if the proposal is approved it would be significantly detrimental to the appearance and character of the Conservation Area.

14. Surrey County Council (Archaeology) – Raises no objections subject to condition in relation to submission of a written scheme of investigation.

15. Surrey County Council (Highways) – No objections subject to conditions and informatives.

16. Natural England – No objections.

17. Surrey Bat Group – No objections to the proposal.

18. Surrey Wildlife Trust – No objections.

19. Tree Officer – No objections subject to conditions in relation to tree protection.

Positive and Proactive Engagement

20. The revised NPPF 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.

21. Formal pre-application was submitted prior to the submission of this application, post refusal of application 2015/2684. This advice offered in principle support to the proposal and design. That advice was the Planning Officer’s informal opinion based upon the information provided and cannot fully anticipate the formal consideration of a planning application. As such this view is not binding in the determination of this application.

Planning Considerations

22. The main planning considerations for this application are:

Principle of development; Impact on the character of the surrounding area and heritage assets; Impact on residential amenities; Amenities of the future occupiers of the development;

Impact on highway, including access and parking; Archaeological implications; Impact on trees; Biodiversity; Financial considerations.

Principle of development

23. The application site comprises previously developed land located reasonably well in relation to the local services in Weybridge town centre and to the local public transport. The redevelopment of such land for housing is encouraged by policies CS1 and CS2 of the Core Strategy and by the NPPF. Policy CS4 identifies that there is scope for additional residential development across the Weybridge area, primarily through redevelopment of previously developed land outside of high flood risk areas.

24. 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). The proposed density would be 59dph.

25. The proposal would provide 9 x 2 and 1 x 3 bed units. The Council has an identified a need for 1 and 2 bed units, set out in the latest Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2016. The Council’s Authority Monitoring Report 2015-2016 identifies that of the dwellings built in the monitoring period 43% had four or more bedrooms, 32% had one bedroom and just 25% had two or three bedrooms. As such the provision of these units would give significant weight to the planning benefits of the proposal.

26. The updated NPPF (July 2018) was published subsequent to the pre-application advice being provided. The new 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’.

27. 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).’

28. The site, whilst in office (B1) use, is not designated as a Strategic Employment Land and the

loss of potential employment is not considered to raise any significant issues in the context of Policy CS23. The most recent Employment Land Review (March 2011) confirmed that there is a surplus of office accommodation in the Borough and the demand is not anticipated to increase in the Plan period. The more recent Commercial Property Report (July 2017)

however identifies that due to Prior Approval change of use applications for the loss of commercial office space have the potential to impact supply of smaller office space. It is considered that on balance, whilst the proposal would result in the loss of employment floorspace, it would not be on Strategic Employment Land, and the proposal would make more effective use of this district centre location and provide housing units which meet an identified need within the borough. Impact on the character of the surrounding area and heritage assets

29. Policy CS4 states that ‘all new development will need to be well designed, integrate with, and enhance local character. Development in areas of heritage value, specifically in and around Weybridge town centre […] will take account of their [its] historic context and any relevant Conservation Area Character Appraisal.’

30. The proposed building would be of a more significant scale than the existing, and would occupy a prominent site within Weybridge, visible from various points of the compass, with its most significant frontages being south to Balfour Road and west to Devonshire Road. The proposed building would be two storey with rooms in the roofspace served by dormers, and would be raised above ground level on a plinth (which acts as a terrace) to accommodate a basement car park. The building would be located in the centre of the site, with greater separation to the front (south) and rear (north) boundaries to allow space for landscaping and vehicle access respectively. The design of the building is Georgian inspired and would pick up on architectural details from the adjoining Grade II Listed Building Portmore Cottage (No. 56) and Portmore House (No. 54). The Balfour Road elevation has been designed with three distinct projections to break up the elevation and help to stagger the building frontage in relation to the angled boundary. The Devonshire Road frontage has again been split into three distinct projections which help to transition the building to the building line of Devonshire Road to the north and break up its frontage. Whilst the building would undoubtably have a greater visual impact than the existing, it is considered its design would pay sufficient regard to the character of the area and the adjoining heritage assets. It would make the most of its corner plot and create a building that would help ‘turn the corner’ on this junction.

31. The building would be screened by a boundary wall which would obscure views of the raised plinth, and it is not considered this aspect would appear incongruous. The building would be higher than the highest point of the existing. Whilst the existing building contains large elements of pitched roof, and the proposed building with its crown roof form would be bulkier, it would still not be so significant as to represent a harmful feature in the streetscene. Taking a visual cue from Portmore Cottage the new building would feature two storeys with rooms in the roof served by dormers set behind a parapet roof. There would be a significant physical separation to the adjoining Grade II Listed Building (Portmore Cottage) to the east and it is not considered the proposal would have a dominant or overbearing impact upon this important heritage asset.

32. Pedestrian access to the building would be from Devonshire Road, and the building would be served by a distinct entrance feature. Vehicle access to the site would be in the same position as the existing and would lead to the proposed basement car park. It is considered the design and layout of this to be acceptable and would allow car parking on the site without creating a dominant car parking area above ground. The existing surface car parking area is not of any benefit to the visual amenity of the area.

33. The site is located in proximity to a number of heritage assets, both Statutorily designated or locally designated. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 in relation to Listed Buildings requires that local authorities shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building/s or their setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest. Section 72 of the same Act in relation to Conservation Areas requires that special attention be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.

34. The building is located within the Conservation Area, and is adjoined to the east, as previously referred, by Portmore Cottage and Portmore House, a Grade II Listed building. Further east

are two more Grade II Listed Buildings (44-52 and 42 Church Street), and to the south east the Grade II* Church of St James. To the south of the site on the corner of Heath Road and Balfour Road is another Significant Unlisted Building (1 Balfour Road), and to the west on the opposite site of Devonshire Road is another Significant Unlisted Building (4 Balfour Road). The Councils Listed Building Advisor originally objected to the proposal, but following receipt of amended plans and additional supporting evidence to justify the loss of the Significant Unlisted Building, now raises no objections to the proposal, commenting:

‘The evolution of this replacement scheme has been long and has been the subject of many discussions with the developer. Firstly, it has been accepted that the relatively modern Locke-King House had suffered many alterations which had left very little architectural detail and that its removal could be acceptable provided that the replacement building respected the character of the conservation area and the setting of nearby listed buildings. The current proposal now avoids a monolithic form by being articulated on plan on both its principal frontages. This now produces projections and set-backs which reduce the perceived scale of the building and better reflect the internal plan form of the apartments. The new block is set back further into the side such that the listed No 56 is more visible when approaching the mini-roundabout from Balfour Road. The existing brick retaining wall is retained on both frontages, thus maintaining the scale of the immediate street-scape. The overall height of the upper storey equates broadly with the height of the listed No 56 next door.

I do not consider the proposal would harm the setting of any listed building in the vicinity nor would it impact negatively on the character of the conservation area. It is very important however that the detailing and materials used preserve the special quality of the conservation area. I have no adverse comments to a building of this type and form in this position, subject to the highest quality of soft landscape and materials being employed.’

35. The Listed Building Advisor therefore considers that the proposal would protect the character

of the Conservation Area and adjoining Listed Buildings. It is considered due to changes made to the existing Locke King House historically that it loss would not involve the loss of significant amounts of original fabric or period detailing so be acceptable. The Councils Conservation Officer also originally objected to the proposal. Following submission of amended plans however the Conservation Officer was not able to withdraw their objection, concluding “I therefore remain of the opinion that the development currently proposed is still too large and would appear over-dominant. Therefore, whilst I accept that the current scheme would have comparatively less impact on the setting of adjacent listed buildings, I do not consider that it would make sufficiently positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area to justify replacing the existing building”. The objections from the conservation officer are noted, but regard is also had to the lack of objection from the Listed Building Advisor, and the benefits the scheme provides in terms of provision of new residential units within the urban area which meet the identified need within the borough.

36. The proposed building would cover less of the site than the previous refused scheme (2015/2684) and maintain greater separation to the site boundaries. It is therefore considered the proposal has overcome those previous reasons for refusal relating to scale, bulk and mass in conjunction with the close proximity to site boundaries.

37. It is therefore considered that on balance, the proposal would have an acceptable impact upon the character of the area, the streetscene and would preserve the character of the Conservation Area and preserve the setting of the adjoining Listed Buildings, and in reaching this conclusion, the local authority has satisfied their duty in regard to consideration of the application having regard to the requirements of Sections 66 and 72 and of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The loss of the significant unlisted building is considered to be acceptable, due in part to the significant changes which have previously occurred to this building, and the provision of a replacement building which would preserve the character of the area.

Impact on residential amenities

38. Any application should not lead to an unacceptable impact upon the amenities of the adjoining neighbouring occupiers. It is considered the proposal would have an acceptable impact upon the amenities of adjoining residents amenities. In terms of buildings likely to be impacted by the proposal, Portmore Cottage (No. 56 Church Street) to the east is in use as an office, Gable End to the north is in residential use and No. 4 Balfour Road to the west is used as a children’s nursery. It is considered the proposal would not impact the amenities of the occupiers of the non-residential buildings. Gable End is a residential dwelling which fronts Devonshire Road, and whose flank would face the proposed building and access. It is considered there would be sufficient physical separation between that dwelling and the proposed building (indicated by lack of infringement of the vertical 25 degree line when measured from the main side wall of this property) that it would not have an unacceptable impact upon light or outlook and not have an overbearing impact upon the occupiers of this dwelling. An existing 1.6m boundary wall would be retained on the boundary with this property, and a 3m brick wall on the eastern boundary. Buildings on the southern side of Balfour Road are in this location occupied with commercial uses on ground floor with flats above. It is considered the proposed building would have an acceptable impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of these buildings in regard to light and outlook, having regard to the presence of the existing Locke King House and the separation marked by the road.

39. It is considered the would have an acceptable impact upon privacy and overlooking to

adjoining properties. As referred above some properties in the immediate vicinity are of a commercial nature where possible overlooking is considered less harmful than when compared to that occurring to residential properties. It is noted that there are significant window openings on the eastern flank of the building, including external terrace areas. These would face towards the adjoining Listed Building which is in commercial use. It is not considered that these would have any unacceptable adverse impact on the occupiers of the adjoining building to the east. There are again numerous window openings on the western elevation which face towards No. 4 Balfour Road, which is in use as a children’s nursery. It is considered as this site is already overlooked from the existing building (albeit to a lesser extent) it would not unacceptable harm the amenities of the occupiers of this building. The adjoining dwelling to the north Gable End is currently screened by trees (located within their curtilage), and there are existing windows which face north towards this dwelling. It is however acknowledged the proposed building would bring the built form closer to this property, and introduce windows at a higher level than existing, which could impact upon overlooking or the perception of overlooking. The northern elevation includes 5 windows at first floor level, external terrace area and 1 dormer window (secondary source of light to a kitchen). Whilst the proposal would increase overlooking when compared to the existing, it is considered due to the separation between the buildings, the position of the terrace (facing the side elevation of Gable End and not the rear garden area) and the use of suitable condition to ensure the north facing dormer window is obscurely glazed, then on balance, the impact on overlooking and privacy would be acceptable in this edge of district centre location (note the site boundary of Gable End forms the boundary to the district centre).

40. It is considered the proposal would have an acceptable impact on those properties to the south which front Balfour Road. as referred previously these are of a commercial nature at ground floor with residential flats above. It is considered that the separation between those existing buildings and the proposed and the busy road running between them, means any impacts on privacy would be acceptable in this district centre location, where one would expect to have more mutual overlooking in a town centre location.

41. The proposed access would be located in the same part of the site as the existing, and vehicles would pass along the northern part of the before entering the basement car park, whose entrance is located towards the north east corner of the site. It is considered the location and size of the access would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity. The nearest property, Gable End, is already located close to the site entrance, and the existing car park which serves the existing Locke King House. It is not considered the

proposed arrangement would increase the level of disturbance beyond the existing and much of the associated noise/disturbance from vehicles (slamming doors, revving engines etc) would occur underground in the basement car park as opposed to the current surface car park which adjoins their boundary.

42. It is considered that the proposal as a whole would be sited at sufficient distance from other neighbouring boundaries and elevations to avoid material harm to amenity. The proposal is therefore considered on balance to have an acceptable impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, in terms of light, outlook, privacy, overbearing impact and noise and disturbance. Amenities of the future occupiers of the development

43. Turning to the impact on the amenities of proposed occupiers, it is considered that all the

proposed units would provide an acceptable level of residential amenity. All units would exceed the minimum internal floorspace requirements as set out in the Technical housing standard – nationally described space standard, and would benefit from suitable outlook and benefit from natural light. Each unit would have dual aspect and would benefit from private amenity space. There would be an area of external green space at the front (Balfour Road frontage) which would allow occupiers to sit out if they wished, and the site is adjacent to the Weybridge town centre with its numerous amenities and facilities, including the River Wey to the west (approx. 250m) and the Churchfield Recreation Ground (approx. 230m). It is considered the proposed building would therefore provide a high-quality standard of living accommodation for proposed occupiers, and they would have access to amenities in the town centre which would reduce the reliance on car travel.

44. The proposal would include basement car and cycle parking, as well as ‘lock up’ storage units for each flat to allow them to store items that may typically be stored in a garage or shed. It is considered this would be of further benefit to proposed occupiers. Sufficient refuse provision has been made within the development, and arrangements for its collection. Impact on highway, including access and parking

45. The County Highway Authority was consulted on the application and raised no objections on highway safety, capacity or policy grounds subject to the imposition of a conditions in relation to the access and submission of a construction management plan being submitted prior to commencement of development to ensure during development highway safety for pedestrians and vehicles is not compromised. The Highway Officer considered the proposal would be unlikely to lead to a significant increase in vehicular movements associated with the site.

46. The proposal would provide 20 car parking spaces, and space for 14 bicycles. This provision would exceed the Councils adopted maximum parking standard. Having regard to this, and the sites district centre location, it is considered the proposal would provide acceptable parking provision that would adequately serve the proposed development and not lead to an increase in parking stress in the surrounding area that would be detrimental to the amenities of local residents. There are yellow lines to prevent dangerous parking in the immediate vicinity, and parking controls within the district centre to prevent dangerous parking.

47. It is therefore considered the proposed parking provision to be acceptable and in accordance with the Councils adopted standard. The proposal would, subject to conditions, not impact upon the safe operation of the highway. The proposal would therefore have an acceptable impact upon highways and parking. Archaeological implications

48. The application site is located within an area classed as being of High Archaeological Potential. An archaeological Officer from SCC Heritage Team reviewed the proposal, and in light of studies undertaken for the 2015 application on the site, subject to a condition in relation to the requirement for the submission of a Written Scheme of Investigation prior to the carrying out of any construction works on site raises no objections to the proposal.

Impact on trees

49. There are a number of trees on the northern boundary of the site. No trees of significance are proposed to be removed as part of this proposal. The Councils tree officer was consulted on the proposal and raised no objections subject to the imposition of conditions in relation to tree protection and in relation to securing details of new tree planting. Biodiversity

50. The proposal was supported by an ecological appraisal. Following consultation with both the Surrey Wildlife Trust and the Surrey Bat Group no objections were raised on ecological grounds subject to the imposition of a condition to secure the recommended enhancements to ecology set out in the submitted ecology report. Financial considerations New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination

51. 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.

52. 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 2018/19 is £1.1 million.

53. 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

54. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that development resulting in 6-14 residential units or more should provide 30% of the gross number of dwellings on site as Affordable Housing. It is acknowledged that a revised (July 2018) 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.

55. 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.

56. 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: a) off-site provision or an appropriate financial contribution in lieu can be robustly justified…’

57. 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.

58. 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.

59. 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.

60. 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 affect on 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.

61. Based on the above, the appropriate level of provision was calculated. The applicant submitted a viability appraisal, which following reviews by the Councils viability assessors who concluded that the proposal would not be viable based on the submitted information if a financial contribution towards affordable housing was received. Therefore, in this instance, a zero contribution towards affordable housing is considered acceptable.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

62. The proposed development is liable for CIL. The applicant has provided the relevant forms in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Pre-commencement conditions

63. The agent has confirmed their agreement to the pre-commencement conditions recommended

to be attached to this permission.

Matters raised in Representations

64. The material planning considerations have been covered in the above report

65. In regard to errors on submitted plans these were corrected once they had been identified. Neighbours were notified of the submission of amended plans.

66. In regard to the basement flooding, the site is located within the lowest risk area of fluvial risk, and is not an area classified as being at risk or surface water flooding. Flood proofing of the basement would be a matter in this instance therefore which would be required at building regulations stage, and so be covered by other primary legislation.

Conclusion

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

considered to be in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, the recommendation is to grant permission.

The proposed development does require a CIL payment

Recommendation: Grant Permission

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: 1782-EX-1 received on 23.05.2017. 1782-SK-111g, 1782-SK-112g, 1782-SK-113g, 1782-SK-117g, 1782-SK-122g, 1782-SK-123g received on 01.06.2018. 1782-SK-116h(2), 1782-SK-120h(2), 1782-SK-121h received on 02.08.2018. 1782-SK-124H, 1782-SK-125H received on 14.08.2018.

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

3 MATERIALS SAMPLES

NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE ABOVE SLAB LEVEL 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

The dormer window on the northern elevation of the development hereby permitted shall be glazed with obscure glass and fitted with non-opening principal lights, and subsequently maintained in this form. Such glass shall be sufficiently obscure to prevent loss of privacy. The affixing of an obscure film will not be sufficient.

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

5 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) (b) and (c) if required has been completed by a competent person. 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, asbestos assessment of the existing buildings and 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) Asbestos survey If asbestos is identified in the desk study, an intrusive demolition asbestos survey in accordance with HSG264 supported by an appropriate mitigation scheme to control risks must be carried out. The scheme must be written by a suitably qualified person and shall be submitted to the LPA prior to commencement of demolition. The scheme as submitted shall demonstrably identify potential sources of asbestos contamination and detail removal or mitigation appropriate for the proposed end use. Detailed working methods are not required but the scheme of mitigation and confirmation of compliance with this shall independently verified prior to demolition. The enforcing authority with regard to asbestos on a demolition or construction site is the Health and Safety Executive.

c) 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 detailing any remediation requirements shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

d) 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.

e) 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.

f) Piling

Development approved by this permission shall not commence unless the method 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 approved method.

g) 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.

h) 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 2018 and Policy DM5 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

7 ARCHAEOLOGY INVESTIGATION

No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority.

Reason: The above condition is required in order that the development should not harm the area of archaeological potential in accordance with Policy DM12 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

8 EXISTING ACCESS

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the existing access to Devonshire Road has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and provide tactile paving at the crossing point across the bellmouth and the maximum achievable sightlines and thereafter the sightlines shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction overhanging the highway along the site frontage onto Devonshire Road between 0.6 metres and 2 metres high above the ground.

Reason: The above condition is required in order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with policy

DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 and Policy CS25 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011.

9 CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT PLAN

No development shall commence until a Construction Transport Management Plan, to include details of:

(a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors (b) loading and unloading of plant and materials (c) storage of plant and materials (d) programme of works (including measures for traffic management) (e) provision of boundary hoarding behind any visibility zones (f) measures to prevent the deposit of materials on the highway (g) no HGV movements to or from the site shall take place between the hours of 8.00 and 9.15am

and 3.00 and 4.00 pm nor shall the contractor permit any HGVs associated with the development at the site to be laid up, waiting, in Devonshire Road and Balfour Road during these times have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction of the development.

Reason: The above condition is required in order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 and Policy CS25 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011.

10 TREE PROTECTION AND PRE-COMMENCEMENT INSPECTION

BEFORE DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE TREE PROTECTION MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND ANY FURTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED ARBORICULTURAL INFORMATION. THE APPLICANT SHALL ARRANGE A PRE-COMMENCEMENT MEETING AFTER THE INSTALLATION OF THE TREE PROTECTION BETWEEN THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THE APPLICANT'S PROJECT ARBORICULTURIST TO ALLOW INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION OF THE PROTECTION MEASURES.

Reason: This permission is granted on the basis that the trees would remain on site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the demolition and construction works could have implications for the future health and amenity of retained trees within the site.

11 TREE PROTECTION

In this condition "retained tree" means an existing tree, which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b) below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the first occupation of the development.

a) no retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Borough Council. Any pruning shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (tree work) and in accordance with any supplied arboricultural method statement.

b) 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 Borough Council.

c) tree protection shall be maintained in-situ and not moved or removed until all construction has finished and equipment, materials, or machinery are removed from site.

d) any arboricultural protection information and plans submitted as part of the application, and listed in the approved plans condition, or submitted to meet a condition of consent shall be implemented and adhered to at all times during the construction process unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Borough Council. This shall include any requirement for

arboricultural supervision and site monitoring. This condition may only fully be discharged on completion of the development subject to satisfactory written evidence of contemporaneous supervision and monitoring of tree protection throughout construction by the appointed arboriculturist.

Reason: This permission is only granted on the basis that the trees would remain on site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

12 LANDSCAPING - SCHEME

NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE ABOVE SLAB LEVEL UNTIL FULL DETAILS OF BOTH HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING WORKS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THESE WORKS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT AS APPROVED. THIS SCHEME SHALL INCLUDE INDICATIONS OF ALL HARD SURFACES, WALLS, FENCES, ACCESS FEATURES, THE EXISTING TREES AND HEDGES TO BE RETAINED, TOGETHER WITH THE NEW PLANTING TO BE CARRIED OUT, AND DETAILS OF THE MEASURES TO BE TAKEN TO PROTECT EXISTING FEATURES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

13 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 BOROUGH COUNCIL. ANY TREES OR PLANTS, WHICH WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS IN PURSUANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT DIE, ARE REMOVED, OR BECOME SERIOUSLY DAMAGED OR DISEASED, SHALL BE REPLACED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE WITH OTHERS OF SIMILAR SIZE AND SPECIES, FOLLOWING CONSULTATION WITH THE BOROUGH COUNCIL, UNLESS THE BOROUGH COUNCIL GIVES WRITTEN CONSENT TO ANY VARIATION.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

14 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGE POINTS

Electric vehicle charging points shall be provided to 20% of the available parking spaces prior to the occupation of the approved development, and shall be retained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: To sustain compliance with and contribute towards national objectives for pollutants in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

15 BIODIVERSITY MITIGATION

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations in Bat Emergence Survey Report including any biodiversity enhancements by The Ecology Co-op dated 10.06.2017.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with Policy CS15 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011 and the NPPF.

Informatives 1 HIGHWAYS

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-and-licences/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-community-safety/floodingadvice.

2 HIGHWAYS 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).

3 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.

4 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.

Chantrey

Las Lilas

CourtHall

Gable End

MINO

RCA ROAD

HouseGrove

St James's

1

Quadrant Courtyard

CHURCH

War Memorial

5

64

16.2m

27

STREE

T

60

1 to 9

1 to

2

House

WestellaChildgrove

11

HouseArden

Benedicts

15

DEVON

SHIRE RO

AD

8

1

58

Cornerways

HouseLocke-King

ROAD

48

42

4

44 to

46

BALFOUR

56

CRANE&ASSOCIATES

1 Dawes Court Esher Surrey KT10 9QD01372 470524www.craneassociates.com

LOCKE KING HOUSE WEYBRIDGE

SITE LOCATION

1:1000 @ A3 March 2016

1782-EX-1

0 50m

N

1100

0

BALFOUR ROAD EXISTING

2 BALFOUR ROAD WEYBRIDGE

ELEVATION BALFOUR ROAD

1:200

May 2018

1782-SK-117g

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 10m

BALFOUR ROAD

652

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

EAST ELEVATION

1100

0

DEVONSHIRE ROAD EXISTING


ELEVATION DEVONSHIRE ROAD

1:200

July 2018

1782-SK-116h(2)

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 10m

DEVONSHIRE ROAD PROPOSED STREET VIEW

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

MaterialsPerimeter walls brickPlinth reconstituted Portland stone

painted metal ventillation grillesWalls brick

red guaged brick lintolsred brick quoinscentre portion - white render

Ground floor balstrade reconstituted Portland stonepainted metal infill

Entrance columns reconstituted Portland stoneEntrance porch/baclony reconstituted Portland stoneEntablature reconstituted Portland stoneRoof red clay tilesDormers zincWindows painted timber

NORTH ELEVATION

2000

DEVONSHIRE ROAD EXISTING


ELEVATION DEVONSHIRE ROAD

1:200

July 2018

1782-SK-120h(2)

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 10m

DEVONSHIRE ROAD PROPOSED STREET VIEW

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2000

25º line

1100

0

painted metal gates

new brick wall existing brick wall

15000

existing brick wallexisting brick wall 1950

1650

BALFOUR ROAD EXISTING


ELEVATION BALFOUR ROAD

1:200

July 2018

1782-SK-121h

RATY AND MOLEY


0 10m

BALFOUR ROAD PROPOSED

652

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

2700

2700

2700

1250

515

1100

0

existing brick wall

existing brick wall

Gable End5

4

56


LANDSCAPE PLAN

1:250

May 2018

1782-SK-122g

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

N

existing brick wall 1.6m high


metal gates painted blackand 3 courses of granite setts

metal gate painted black

brick wall

grass boarder withgranite edging

terrace in reconstituted stone slabs

grass boarder withgranite edging

brick paviours to ramp

grass with granite edging

grass with granite edging


grass

new trees Pyrus Calleryana Chanticleer 16-18cm girthin tree pit 0.9x0.9x0.9m

steps in recon stone to matchterrace




exi

stin

g w

all

3m h

igh


brick paviours to ramp

resin bonded gravel and granite sett edging

Reconstituted Portland stone steps and details

metal gate painted black


A

deliveries andvisitor parking

utility

util

ity

en suite

WC

Sh

en suite

en suite

en

suite

sh

en

suite

WCWC en suite




LOWER GROUND

1:250

July 2018

1782-SK-110h

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

N

Plant

789

14

15

16

17

18

4

14no cycle racks

12 11

19

20

10

3

2 1

13

6

5

10

9

8

7

65

4

3

2

1

Refuse

lock-up storage

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECPECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

ECP

Refuse store2no x 1100l2no x 770l1no x 120l

Gable End5

4

5617

.17m


GROUND FLOOR/SITE PLAN

1:250

March 2018

1782-SK-111g

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

X=2.4m

Y=37m

Y=44m

43.9

m

2.4m N

8.28m

A

24.2

m


12.501mFlat 3153sqm2 bed

Flat 4132sqm2 bed

Flat 1169sqm2 bed

Flat 2138sqm2 bed

utility

util

ity

en suite

WC

Sh

en suite

en suite

en

suite

sh

en

suite

WCWC en suite


16.2

sqm

39.4

sqm

33sq

m42

sqm

Gable End5

4

56


1st FLOOR

1:250

March 2018

1782-SK-112g

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

N

A

A

en suite

en suite

WC/utility

en suite

Sh

Utility

Utility

en suite

en suite

WC

dressing

en suite

Sh

WC

Util

ity

Flat 5135sqm2 bed

Flat 6144sqm2 bed

Flat 7151sqm2 bed

Flat 8137sqm2 bed

14.2

sqm

7.8sqm

17.0

sqm

32.9

sqm

Flat 10202sqm3 bed


2ND FLOOR

1:250

March 2017

1782-SK-73D

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

N

A

A

Flat 9125qm2 bed


2nd FLOOR

1:250

March 2018

1782-SK-113g

CRANE&ASSOCIATES


0 12.5m

N

Sh En suite

En suite

En suite

Sh

utility44

.5sq

m

16.2

sqm

type: full wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21491/plng app 2017... · 2018-11-19 · 1 and 2...

Documents