Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting were confirmed and signed by the Chair.

The Committee considered a retrospective application for the demolition of existing dwelling and construction of replacement dwelling and the erection of new single storey rear extension with a pitched roof.

The Officer recommendation was to permit, subject to condition.

Sarah Kemp-Powell, an objector, spoke against the application.

Councillor Liz Lockwood of Dormansland Parish Council spoke against the application.

Carl Morris, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application.

During the course of the debate, Councillor Sir Nicholas White requested that the Committee consider three motions for refusal.  The reasons for refusal were as follows:

1.    The proposal in seeking to replace the original dwelling as approved in 2013, with the subsequent approved extensions and including increased proportions to the extension to these previously approved schemes, cumulatively adds unacceptable build form and bulk which is detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt and visual harm to the adjacent protected landscapes of the High Weald AONB and the Heritage Asset of a protected Historic Parkland. As such the proposal with the increased built form is contrary to Policies CSP18 and CSP20 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy (2008), Policies DP10 and DP20 of the Tandridge District Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies  (2014), the High Weald AONB Design Guide (2019) and para 176 of the NPPF (2023).

2.    The proposal perpetuates the adverse relationship between it and the adjacent properties by being overbearing, overshadowing and dominant. The additional extension amendments sought add to the overbearing and intrusive relationship especially to the property, and its amenities, adjacent to the north of Ridgeway.  As Such the proposal is contrary to the Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy (2008), Policy DP7 of the Tandridge District Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies (2014), and the High Weald AONB Design Guide (2019).

3.    The proposal, by reason of its siting, scale, bulk and design would result in significant harm to the residential amenities of No.54 Beacon Hill by reason of dominance, overbearing and overshadowing effects. As such the proposal would be contrary to Policy DP7 of the Tandridge District Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies (2014) and Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy (2008).

Councillor Steeds proposed all three reasons for refusals, which were seconded by Councillor Chris Farr.  Upon being put to the vote, all three motions were carried.

R E S O L V E D – that the application be refused.

The Committee considered the erection of a single storey flat roofed rear extension, along with a pitched roof over a flat roofed rear extension.

The Officer recommendation was to permit, subject to conditions and Section 106 agreement.

Rachel Farrow, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application.

R E S O L V E D – that the application be permitted subject to the conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

The Committee considered an application for the erection of an agricultural barn for livestock accommodation.

The Officer recommendation was to authorise delegated authority to the Chief Planning Officer to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement.

Mr Adem Mehmet, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application.

R E S O L V E D – that delegated authority be authorised to the Chief Planning Officer to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement.

To receive a verbal update from officers relating to appeal decisions by the Planning Inspectorate resulting from previous committee decisions.

The Committee received a short update on the following appeal decisions:

TA/2022/889 - Wayside, 542 Limpsfield Road, Warlingham, Surrey CR6 9DS.  The application was refused by notice dated 13 December 2022.  The appeal was dismissed on 2 October 2023 (Appeal Reference: APP/M3645/W/22/3313522).

TA/2021/2149 - 6 Beadles Lane, Oxted RH8 9JJ. The application was refused by notice dated 16 June 2022 following the Planning Committee meeting on 9 June 2022.  The appeal was allowed on 2 October 2023 (Appeal Reference: APP/M3645/W/22/3307368).

TA/2022/245 - 5 Queens Park Road, Caterham, Surrey CR3 5RB. The application was refused by notice dated 1 September 2022.  The appeal was allowed on 28 September 2023 (Appeal Reference: APP/M3645/W/22/3311144)

TA/2022/98 - Hut 1, Harestone Drive, Caterham, Surrey CR3 6YQ. The application was refused by notice dated 5 August 2022 following the Planning Committee meeting on 28 July 2022.  The appeal was dismissed on 11 September 2023 (Appeal Reference: APP/M3645/W/22/3309224).