Minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs Farrow, Gibb-Gray, Gillett, Hart, Hunt and J Smith.

There were no declarations.

RESOLVED that the following Council Standing Orders be suspended:

(i)                 Council Standing Order 10 (Deputations) – To remove the normal restrictions on hearing deputations on the same subject within a 6 month period;

(ii)               Council Standing Order 12 (Questions By Members) – To remove the formal Council style questioning of the Leader, Cabinet and Chairmen;

(iii)             Council Standing Order 14 (Motions Without Notice) – To remove the ability to raise motions at the meeting without notice;

(iv)              Council Standing Order 15.16biii (Time Restriction on Officers Speaking at Council) – To remove a 5 minute time restriction on Officers speaking at Council;

(v)        Standing Order 15.4  (Content and length of Speeches) and 15.5 (When a member may speak again) to allow a less formal style of debate; and

(vi)       Standing Order 15.6 (Amendment to Motions) to enable an amendment which negates a motion. Allowed at Development Management Committee to save time and confusion.

The Council considered a planning application which had been referred to Council for decision by the Development Management Committee at its meeting held on 25 October 2012:

Outline application for the erection of 92 open market and affordable dwellings comprising 4 No. 1 bedroom flats; 5 No. 2 bedroom flats; 26 No. 2 bedroom houses; 44 No. 3 bedroom houses; 13 No. 4 bedroom houses; new pumping station; new vehicular access from Brooklands Road including demolition of 2 dwellings; new pedestrian and cycle accesses onto Scratchface Lane and Portsdown Hill Road. (Revised Application.)

The Service Manager for Planning Development gave a substantial update on the written report, highlighting the previous applications, the considerations thereof, the Planning Inquiry held in February 2012 and the recommendation of approval together with an explanation of the proposed conditions. As the S106 Undertaking had now been completed the recommendation was changed to delete the proviso for this to be completed.

The Service Manager for Environmental Health then explained the results of the various noise pollution surveys that had been undertaken on the site highlighting the evidence that the opening of the Hindhead Tunnel had not resulted in a significant increase in traffic noise from the A3M and that the levels recorded on the various occasions were within tolerances.

The Council then received deputations on the application as follows:

Mr Graham, a local resident, spoke against the application citing noise levels as a reason for refusal. He suggested that many other sites of a similar nature had been discounted for development adding that the recorded noise levels at the Scratchface Lane site exceeded World Health Organisation’s thresholds for safe noise levels. He also added that many of the houses would be above the bund that was to act as screening. He urged the Council to refuse the application.

County Councillor Ann Buckley addressed the Council stating that the site was the worst location in the Borough for a housing development suggesting that future residents would not be able to open windows due to the traffic noise. She went on to say at a recent conference of Planning Inspectors it had been said that decisions such as this should be made at a local level and she therefore urged the Council to refuse the application.

County Councillor Liz Fairhurst addressed the Council stating that the circumstances surrounding the application were well known, asking the Council if this type of development was suitable for their children and was it the type of community they wanted. She urged the Council to defer the application while further noise surveys were carried out.

Mr Higgins and Mr Clarke representing the applicant then addressed the Council outlining that extensive local consultation had been carried out and that there were no major objections from any statutory consultee nor the Council. He referred to the Inspector’s comments from the Inquiry adding that the site was a reserve site for development and that the need for affordable housing was rising daily.

Mr Clarke then added  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.