There were no changes to committee membership.

To confirm and sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 25 September 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 September 2024 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor M.Nuti and Councillor C. Mann.

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

There were no declarations of interest.

Proposal: Outline planning application for the phased redevelopment of the site including the demolition of existing buildings and erection of new research and development buildings, with ancillary buildings including car parking, servicing, landscaping improvements, works to public rights of way, flood alleviation and associated works. Access as a matter for consideration (all other matters reserved). (Phased development, each and every phase being a separate and severable part of the development).

The developer was lauded for its engagement with the local community and engaging in proper pre-application and local consultation.

During the debate concern was raised about the potential for impact of the scheme on residents due to the significant build programme, other developments, and the surrounding infrastructure. 

There was a query from  a member regarding whether or not the planned works on the A320 would be completed before any construction on the site commenced.

Officers advised that assurances could not be given, however the application before the Committee was an outline planning application, with a reserved matters application to be submitted prior to construction, and as such there was likely to be sometime before development commenced (if approved).  Indeed it was expected by the applicant that subject to permission construction would commence on the site in 2027, whilst it could not be guaranteed, the A320 works would be expected to be well on the way to being completed by that point.

It was added that the site was a nationally important piece of infrastructure, which had received a very significant contribution from Central Government for its redevelopment.  Whilst the potential inconvenience associated with any construction was acknowledged, a suite of conditions about the construction management phasing would seek to ensure the impact was minimised and engagement work and consultation had occurred with the County Highway Authority.  Officers also considered that the developer was considered to be an accountable, professional government body and based on its conduct so far they were optimistic they the Agency would react proactively to any concerns raised by residents.

In response to concerns about construction traffic entering the area during peak times, officers confirmed that a booking system would be organised by the developer that would ensure traffic would be staggered throughout the day to reduce volume.  Furthermore, only employees would be accessing Grange Road, and would be utilising existing access to do so.  A Committee member advised they would follow up with Surrey County Council around their ongoing plans to install safe crossing points at Woodham Lane.

The construction logistics plan provided by the developer was praised by the committee and cited as a benchmark for other large-scale developments.

Members recognised the important work done at APHA and the scale of investment proposed to support this nationally important infrastructure. As such the development attracted support from the committee.

It was resolved that –

The Head of Planning was authorised to grant permission subject to:

·         No call in being received from the Secretary of State to whom this application needs to be referred under the Town  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Officers reported that Town and Country Planning Regulations required local plans to be reviewed every five years from the date of adoption.  As Runnymede’s Local Plan was approaching the five-year landmark the report sought to formally carry out the review and discharge the Council’s duty in this regard.

A comprehensive review of policies had been undertaken and the main reason certain policies needed updating revolved around the update to the national standard methodology for calculating housing needs, which resulted in an anticipated 24% increase in housing numbers compared to the figure in the existing Local Plan. Other Surrey Boroughs had had significantly greater percentage increases on their figures.

A committee member acknowledged that one of the constraints the Council faced was being surrounded by green belt land, flood plains and special protection areas. It was acknowledged that the green belt review would be an important piece of work.  

It was confirmed that as part of updating the plan, ongoing discussions and briefings with Members would take place to go through existing policy options as the evidence base started to emerge.

It was resolved that –

Planning Committee approved the review of the Runnymede 2030 Local Plan as completed by officers and agreed to its conclusions.

Following Committee approval in May 2024 of the timetable for the production of the next iteration of the Runnymede Local Plan, the change in central government had resulted in confirmation that plan making arrangements would still be implemented, but new arrangements were unlikely to commence until summer/autumn 2025.

Officers set out two options within the report, with the preferred option to push back the Council’s May 2024 Local Plan timetable and prepare an updated Local Plan under the new plan making arrangements.

In the run up to this, Officer time would be spent updating large parts of the evidence base needed to underpin the next iteration of the local plan, whilst the timetable agreed by the Committee would need to be incorporated into a new Local Development Scheme for the Borough.  Furthermore, officers would be seeking to constitute a planning policy advisory group in order to take committee members through the evidence base and develop policy options.

On confirming that the plan making timetable would be front loaded as much as feasibly possible and committee members would receive briefings on proposals to provide officers with a steer on direction of travel of potential policies.

Under the current NPPF, the Council benefits from a protected five-year housing land supply as the Runnymede 2030 Local Plan is less than five years old. However, the new Government is expected to remove this protection when it publishes a revised version of the NPPF in early 2025 due to the desire to supply a large volume of new homes in a short space of time.  Officers considered that the Council were in a good place to defend itself against any speculative planning applications and appeals as Runnymede had been approving development and proactively delivering its current plan, and the crucial thing would be to keep on track with plan making activities.

It was resolved that Planning Committee –

1. Approved the proposed Local Development Scheme for the update of the Runnymede 2030 Local Plan with an implementation date of 31 October 2024.

2. Agreed that delegated authority be given to the Corporate Head of Planning, Economy and the Built Environment in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning Committee to commence plan making:

·         Earlier than set out in the approved Local Development Scheme should the new plan making system get introduced prior to September 2025, or should Runnymede get chosen to be a front runner authority to test the new arrangements, or

·         Up to 2 months later than set out in the approved Local Development Scheme (up to 1st November 2025) should there be a delay in introducing the new plan making arrangements at a national level.

Following the publication of the Housing Delivery Test in December 2023 where the Council scored 87%, a Housing Delivery Action Plan had been produced to positively respond to the challenge of increasing the Council’s housing delivery.  The initial phase would involve reviewing data and indicators to understand how the Council was performing against a series of targets.

The Council’s Head of Planning set out that the Council had been caught by the formula however he was satisfied that the Council was taking a proactive approach to housing delivery. Many Councils had been required to create an action plan for failure to undertake planmaking or failing to make major planning decisions at a local level. This was not the case in Runnymede where the Council works proactively to deliver the development in its recent Local Plan and nearly all decisions are made locally with few housing applications ending up at appeal.

Various planning practice guidance had been considered relevant to Runnymede, including revising site allocation policies, working with developers on the phasing of sites and revisiting strategic land availability assessment to identify sites.  The action plan concluded that Runnymede undertook a wide variety of good practice already, and whilst areas for development had been identified, it was also impacted by global supply issues.

A query was raised around the capacity of the Council’s legal team to process Section 106 agreements.  The Head of Planning confirmed that the Council’s legal team combined with the legal consultancy firm the Council employs dealt with these agreements and provide legal capacity for S106 agreements, however if members had further queries on this matter they would need to be discussed with the Corporate Head of Law and Governance.

Members noted that the good performance of the Council with regards planning matters, and also the measures in the report.

It was resolved that –

Planning Committee approved the Runnymede Housing Delivery Test Action Plan (2024) for publication by 31 October 2024.