Agenda and minutes

All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter:

(i)            any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPIs) and / or

(ii)           other interests arising under the Code of Conduct

in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at the meeting. Anyone with a DPI must, unless a dispensation has been granted, withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the relevant item of business.  If in doubt, advice should be sought from the Monitoring Officer or their staff prior to the meeting.           

Councillor Morrow, as a member of Warlingham Parish Council, declared an interest in agenda item 5.1.  Warlingham Parish Council had expressed an opinion in respect of the application.  Councillor Morrow confirmed he took no part in the forming of the opinion and would be considering the application independently.

Councillor Prew, as a member of the Warlingham Parish Council, also declared an interest in agenda item 5.1.  Councillor Prew confirmed he took no part in the forming of the opinion and would be considering the application independently.

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

The Committee considered an application for the demolition of existing garages and the erection of two semi-detached dwellings with parking, landscaping and access.

The Officer recommendation was to permit, subject to conditions.

A recording of representations from Mr Colin Watt, an objector, was replayed to the Committee.

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

Councillor Morrow proposed the following motions for refusal:

1.         The proposal, by reason of the amount, scale, height and form of the development, would comprise an overdevelopment of the site, which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. As a result, the proposals would fail to maintain or enhance the character and appearance of the area. The proposed design would be incongruous and out of keeping with the appearance of the site and its locality. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy DPD 2008 and Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies 2014.

2          The proposed development, due to the siting of these tall dwellings in close proximity to the buildings and private amenity areas of numbers 434, 436 and.438 Limpsfield  Road, would result in an overbearing and overshadowing relationship to those amenity areas and buildings,  and overlooking and a loss of privacy to the residential occupiers of 438,  adversely impacting on the amenities of the occupiers of 434, 436 and 438 , contrary to Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy and Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies.

3.         The proposals fail to provide appropriate private amenity space for the residents of the proposed dwellings due to the limited areas available, leading to an unsatisfactory environment for the future occupiers of the dwellings, contrary to Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies 2014.

Councillor Duck seconded all three motions.  Upon being put to separate votes, all three motions were lost.

R E S O L V E D – that planning permission be granted.

To deal with any other item(s) which, in the opinion of the Chair, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Chair thanked Councillors Morrow and Duck for their many years of service on the Planning Committee as both Members would be standing down after the May election.