Planning Committee - Wednesday, 9th February, 2022 6.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Runnymede Civic Centre, Addlestone

Contact: Mr B A Fleckney 

No. Item


Minutes pdf icon PDF 312 KB

To confirm and sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19January 2022 (Appendix ‘A’).



The Minutes of the meeting held on 19 January were confirmed and signed as a correct record.


Apologies for Absence


No apologies were received.


Declarations of Interest

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable and non-registrable interests in items on the agenda.



No declarations of interest were made.


Planning Applications pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Item No.

Application No.








Additional documents:


The planning applications listed below were considered by the Committee.  All representations received on the applications were reported and copies had been made available for inspection by Members before the meeting.  The Addendum had also been published on the Council’s website on the day of the meeting. Objectors and applicants/ agents addressed the Committee on those applications specified.



                                    RESOLVED that –


                                                the following applications be determined as indicated: -





RU 21/1750












































































RU 21/1790














































RU 21/1809


















RU 21/1913       















65 Lindsay Road, Addlestone


Erect two-bedroom bungalow with parking on land to the rear of 65-69 Lindsay Road.


Despite the amended design of the proposal, some Members still considered the development was out of character with the area and development of an inappropriate character and siting.


Some Members also raised concerns over water levels at the site and potential flooding, potential use of the roof space for habitable accommodation,poor lighting in the road,sightlines, and sewerage capacity.


Other Members considered that the reasons for refusal of the previous application (RU 20/1081), had been satisfactorily addressed by the amendments in this proposal. Some Members noted that this would provide additional housing stock that might appeal to ‘down-sizers’.


The CHDMBC commented that a detailed site-specific Flood Risk Assessment had been submitted and provided details of a study carried out to determine whether the site fell within flood zone 2 or 1. The study had been reviewed by the Council’s Drainage Engineers who had accepted that the information provided demonstrated that the site fell outside the 1 in a 1000 year flood risk area (Flood zone 1).  A reason for refusal on flooding grounds could not therefore be substantiated.


The CHDMBC further commented that Officers considered that the amended proposal was visually acceptable in the street scene with no harm arising to the character of the area and would be a windfall addition to housing supply. Whilst these matters had to be given weight, ultimately the scale, appearance and context of the proposed development were matters for the Committee to make a judgement on.


With regard to use of the roof space, proposed condition 5 would remove permitted development rights in relation to development within Classes B and C of Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order 2015 as amended but, if approved, the condition could be expanded to specifically prohibit habitable accommodation of roof space (with the exception of storage).


With regard to sightlines, the CHDMBC commented that It was unlikely that this stretch of road would attract high speeding vehicles, was relatively straight and SCC Highway Authority had not raised an objection to the application. As the proposal only added one dwelling, the impact on the sewerage system would not be significant to warrant refusal of the application.  Finally, It would not be proportionate to impose a condition requiring lighting.


After due consideration, the Committee was minded to approve the application with the amended condition 5 prohibiting habitable accommodation in roof space.


It was noted that a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 445.


Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA) Findings


The Council had commissioned consultants to undertake the Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA), a key piece of evidenced based work which would underpin the review of the Local Plan. One of the key outputs of the HEDNA was the calculation of the minimum housing need figure to be accommodated in the Borough in the next iteration of the Local Plan.


The calculation of housing need was undertaken using a standard method set out in Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) using nationally available datasets. There was an expectation in national policy and guidance that local authorities would follow this method when developing their Local Plans, unless they considered that ‘exceptional circumstances’ existed for not doing so.


The initial findings of the consultants undertaking the HEDNA were presented to Committee and the consultants responded to various questions raised by Members thereon.


Having received the presentation, the Committee agreed that the Council and those working on the HEDNA on behalf of the Council should follow the Government’s standard method for calculating housing need for the review of the Local Plan.


                        RESOLVED that: 


The Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA) follows the Government’s Standard Methodology for assessing housing need and that the next iteration of the Runnymede 2030 Local Plan be based on this figure