application no: application full type: wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21571/planning...

Application No: 2018/0632 Application Type:

FULL

Case Officer: Aneta Mantio Ward: Weybridge St Georges Hill Ward

Expiry Date: 06/07/2018

Location: Lincoln Court Old Avenue Weybridge Surrey KT13 0PH

Proposal: Detached part five/part four/part three-storey building with basement parking containing 28 flats following demolition of existing block of flats and 2 existing garage blocks.

Applicant: Old Avenue (No.1) Ltd

Agent: Mr Mark Willmott MRP Developments Services Limited Ground Floor Innovation House Apex Business Park Ruddington Lane Nottingham NG11 7DD

Decision Level: If Permit – Sub-Committee If Refuse – Sub-Committee

Recommendation: Permit

Representations: Letters of objection from 37 addresses including one from the Weybridge Society and one from Ormonde Place (Weybridge) Management company have been received concerned with the following issues:

• Out of keeping with the area (design, size, height, overdevelopment (density is too high), breach of building lines);

• Potential impact on protected trees;

• Loss of amenities (overlooking; light; disturbance (noise and pollution) due to the access ramp);

• Insufficient amenities provided to the future occupiers;

• Location of proposed bin store;

• Highway implications (insufficient parking for visitors and contractors; congestion; safety of the proposed access; widening of the access from Gower Road would result in loss of on-street parking);

• Impact on existing infrastructure;

• Flats are inappropriate in this location (away from the main highways);

• Concerns relating to a deep basement (ground stability; water table), drainage and sewer system;

• Is there any affordable housing?

• Disruption during construction;

• Inadequate consultation with residents was carried out by the Council (all residents in Old Avenue should have been consulted).

***This application qualifies for public speaking***

R e p o r t

Description

1. The application site of approximate area 0.31ha is a corner plot located to the north of Gower

Road and to the east of Old Avenue, both being residential roads in Weybridge. The site is currently occupied by a 1960’s three-storey block of vacant nine flats with a large expanse of hardstanding used as a car park and an access route to the garages to the northeast corner of the site. The vehicular access is currently provided from Gower Road with an additional pedestrian access from Old Avenue. The application site is bound by low brick wall with

approximately 2m high brick piers and metal railings with trees and mature hedges beyond, which is currently situated beyond the blue painted board type development site hoarding. Numerous trees on site are protected by the Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

2. The site lies in the Lower St George’s Hill and East of Brooklands Road character area, as defined in the Council’s Design and Character SPD. This area is characterised by a mix of large detached houses and flats often set in generous wooded plots. Due to its gateway location and relative proximity to Weybridge railway station, the area could potentially accommodate flatted development depending on the size of the plot.

Constraints

3. The relevant planning constraints are:

• Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area - 5km buffer zone

• TPO (Tree Preservation Order EL:11/30 and EL:06/06)

• Surface Water Flooding – low risk Policy

4. In addition to the revised National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance, the following local policies and guidance are relevant to the determination of this application:

Core Strategy CS1 – Spatial Strategy CS4 – Weybridge CS13 – Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area CS15 – Biodiversity CS17 – Local Character, Density and Design CS19 – Housing Type and Size CS21 – Affordable Housing CS25 – Travel and Accessibility CS26 – Flooding Development Management Plan 2015 DM1 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development DM2 – Design and amenity DM6 – Landscape and trees DM7 – Access and parking DM8 – Refuse, recycling and external plant DM10 – Housing DM21 – Nature conservation and biodiversity Design & Character SPD 2012 Including the Companion Guide: Weybridge Developer Contributions SPD 2012 Flood Risk SPD 2016 Relevant Planning History

5. Numerous proposals have been considered on this site, however the most relevant recent

application is outlined below:

Reference Description Decision

2015/2833 Detached part four/part three/part two storey building with basement parking containing 15 flats following demolition of existing block of

Granted (23/03/2016) This permission has not yet been implemented, however

flats and 2 existing garage blocks it remains extant

Proposal

6. Permission is sought for the redevelopment of the site comprising a detached part five/part

four/part three-storey building with basement parking containing 28 flats following demolition of existing block of flats and 2 existing garage blocks.

7. The proposed development would be undertaken in the form of a single building measuring

approximate maximum of 34.3m deep (the elevation along Old Avenue), 38.5m wide (along Gower Road) with a maximum height of 13.8m. The building would maintain the following approximate minimum gaps to the boundaries: 9.3m to the east; 8.1m to the north; 10.3m to the west (Old Avenue); and 12m to the south (Gower Road).

8. The access to the underground car park would be provided via a ramp, off Gower Road, as the

existing. 71 parking spaces, as well as 28 cycle spaces and a dedicated waste storage would be provided.

9. The current proposal is an amendment to the above approved. The alterations are summarised

in the table below:

2015/2833 2018/0632

The number of units 15 28

Housing mix 3 x 2-bed & 12 x 3-bed units

2 x 1-bed, 17 x 2-bed & 9 x 3-bed

Internal height of each habitable storey 2.85m 2.5m

Number of storeys of accommodation Four Five

Access to the underground parking Car lift Ramp

Parking provision – vehicles 36 71

Parking provision – cycle 15 28

10. The applicant provided reasons for the submission of a further application even though the

previous permission remains extant. Since 2016, when permission ref. 2015/2833 was granted, there has been a change to the housing market demand affecting primarily properties priced in excess of £1mil. As the original scheme consisted of larger apartments falling within the above margin; and as the applicant seeks bringing the site forward, the internal layout of the building had been redesigned to enable for the delivery of smaller units.

11. The application is accompanied by the following supporting documents:

• Design and Access Statement;

• Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement;

• Model Surface Water Drainage Statement;

• Surface Water Storage Requirements;

• Greenfield runoff estimation;

• Site drainage evaluation;

• Ecological Survey; and

• Financial Viability Assessment.

Consultations

12. Amended plans have been accepted during the course of the application. Third parties have been notified of these changes. The latest amendments have been made due to the concerns relating to the proposed alterations to the ground levels within the root protection areas (RPAs) of the protected trees. The amended set of plans includes the ground levels already agreed previously in most areas. On this basis, the tree officer withdrew his objection to the proposal. The alterations to the building associated with these changes resulted in the increased sill heights of the ground floor openings. Due to the minor nature of these changes, no further re-consultation took place.

13. Surrey County Council (Transportation) – The Highway Authority has assessed the impact of

the proposal on highway safety, capacity and policy grounds and raised no objections subject to conditions and informative.

14. Environmental Health Services (Contamination) – Raise no objection, subject to a condition and informative.

15. Tree Officer – Raises no objection, subject to conditions.

16. Surrey County Council (LLFA – Local Lead Flooding Authority) – Due to the lack of information submitted they recommended a refusal. However, they subsequently verbally confirmed that the submission of the outstanding information might be subject to the recommended condition.

17. Natural England – Raised no objection subject to appropriate mitigation being secured.

18. Surrey Bat Group – Raised no objection.

19. Surrey Wildlife Trust – Raised no objection.

20. Thames Water - No objection, subject to informative.

Positive and Proactive Engagement

21. The revised NPPF requires local planning authorities to work with the applicant in a positive

and proactive manner to resolve problems before the application is submitted and to foster the delivery of sustainable development. This requirement is met within Elmbridge through the availability of pre-application advice.

22. No formal pre-application advice was sought prior to the submission of the current application.

Planning Considerations

23. The relevant planning considerations in the determination of this application are:

• Principle of development;

• Impact on the character of the surrounding area;

• Impact on residential amenities;

• Impact on highway, including access and parking;

• Impact on biodiversity & Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area;

• Flooding and SuDS;

• Financial considerations.

Principle of development

24. The revised NPPF (para 122) seeks to support development that makes efficient use of land taking into account the identified need for different types of housing; local market conditions and viability; the availability and capacity of infrastructure and services; the desirability of maintaining an area’s prevailing character and setting (including residential gardens); and the importance of securing well-designed, attractive and healthy places. Para 123 continues that where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities, and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site. Elmbridge Core Strategy Policy CS4 identifies that there is scope for additional residential development across the Weybridge area, primarily through redevelopment of previously developed land outside of high flood risk areas.

25. The Elmbridge Core Strategy indicates that there is a scope for residential development through the redevelopment of existing sites with well-designed schemes that integrate with and enhance the local character. As such, the principle of development is supported. The new

development is required to deliver high quality design, which maximises the efficient use of land and which responds to the positive features of individual locations; integrating sensitively with locally distinct townscape while protecting the amenities of those living in the area. Housing mix

26. Policy DM10 states that housing development on sites of 0.3ha or more should promote house types and sizes that make most efficient use of land and meet the most up to date measure of local housing need, whilst reflecting the character of the area. Policy CS19 seeks to secure a range of housing types and sizes on developments reflecting the most up to date SHMA in terms of the size and type of the dwellings.

27. The 2016 SHMA identifies the need for a higher proportion of 1, 2 and 3 bed homes in the Borough. Data from the latest monitoring report 2016/17 (published February 2018) state that 1, 2 and 3-bedroom homes should make up 90% of the delivery of gross new market homes. This is supplemented by the SHMA 2016, which identifies the housing mix required as a proportion of our housing need.

28. At the end of the 2016/17 monitoring year, the Council recorded a total of 357 gross new market homes completed. Of the 357 gross new market homes 1, 2 and 3-bedroom homes accounted for 26%, 34% and 9.5% of gross delivery respectively. Homes with bedrooms of 4 or more should account for 10% or 1% (based on the Core Strategy or SHMA respectively) of gross new market homes but in this monitoring year accounted for 30.5%, more than either 1, 2 and 3-bedroom homes. The table blow indicates the mix of housing needed in Elmbridge based on the 2016 SHMA (Source: Authority Monitoring Report 2016/17).

Size of Unit No. of Units Required Percentage of Objectively Assessed Housing Need

1 2,654 28%

2 3,982 42%

3 2,749 29%

4+ 95 1%

Total 9,480 100%

29. The proposal includes 2 x 1-bed, 17 x 2-bed & 9 x 3-bed flats that is in line with the objectively

assessed housing need and therefore complaint with the policy requirements in these terms. The intensification of the site from the 2015 permission is therefore supported. Affordable Housing

30. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that development resulting in the net gain of 15 and more residential units should provide 40% of the gross number of dwellings on-site as affordable housing. Based on the above, the appropriate level of the on-site affordable housing provision was calculated. The applicant however provided a viability assessment (VA) indicating that a provision towards the affordable housing would not assist in the deliverability of the scheme. The Council has sought advice from its own viability consultants, DSP Ltd, who offered the following comments:

In reviewing the scheme details and VA many of the assumptions utilised do not appear unreasonable. The submitted scheme is however clearly unviable based on the assumptions set out in the VA, leading to a deficit against the land value benchmark submitted of approximately £3.35m (based on a target profit of 20% GDV). This is the case regardless of the affordable housing contribution sought and in fact, as submitted by the applicant returns an actual profit of approximately 6.47% of GDV (i.e. removing the scheme deficit by reducing the level of profit). This indicates that either this is the level of profit that is acceptable to the developer to enable the scheme to proceed; the build cost assumptions are too high, the site value is too high (i.e. an issue over site selection), sales value assumptions are too low, or the profit expectation is too high, or a combination of those things. As presented, the scheme does not appear to be deliverable without affordable housing and as such any

affordable housing contribution is not making the difference between a viable and unviable scheme.

In order to test the scope for any level of financial contribution, DSP have carried out sensitivity testing on the applicant’s appraisal by altering the assumptions. The actual profit realised when using our adjusted figures within the appraisal is approximately 11.46% (i.e. in order to meet the benchmark land value the profit needs to be ‘reduced’ to 11.46% of GDV). It is considered therefore that due to the significant adjustments needed to be made to the appraisals in order to present an outcome that appears even marginally viable, it seems clear that the scheme as presented is undeliverable by any normal standards and that it is not the affordable housing or any other planning obligation affecting the viability of the scheme. That said even by reviewing all of the input assumptions and adjusting those as described within this report, it seems improbable that a sufficient surplus could be generated in order to fund a contribution to either on-site affordable housing or a financial contribution.

31. Based on the above assessment, it is considered that exceptional circumstances exist for no

affordable housing contribution being made in this instance.

32. A review mechanism following the implementation of the scheme was sought on some other development sites in the Borough. As the application site benefits from an extant permission that was also a subject to a viability review with a nil contribution agreed; and as this permission is not subject to a review mechanism, it is not considered appropriate to impose such a clause within the legal agreement in this instance. Impact on the character of the surrounding area

33. The surrounding area of the application site is characterised by individually designed large

dwellings and flatted developments, set within good sized landscaped gardens. The existing building of T-shaped footprint is located centrally within the plot with the Old Avenue elevation being the most prominent. The proposed building of a larger, approximately square footprint would be set on the same footprint as the existing and would maintain separation distances in excess of 8m at the minimum to all boundaries, which are similar to those established within the Old Avenue street scene at Ormonde Place, the neighbouring block of flats to the north. The majority of the existing trees of amenity value would be retained and these are predominantly sited along the boundaries. The Council’s tree officer is satisfied that only the poorer specimen would be removed as a result of the proposed development; and subject to conditions, the protection and the long-term health of the others would be secured.

34. As indicated above, the proposed development would be of a very similar scale, massing and height as the previously approved scheme under the ref. 2015/2833. As such, the built form of these parameters is considered, as before, acceptable in terms of its impact on the appearance of the surrounding area. The overall design of the building would also widely remain the same. As a result, the level of visual impact of the permitted and of the currently considered schemes would be virtually the same. However, to enable the delivery of a much higher number of units, the proposal has to accommodate appropriate level of parking, which could potentially have a significant impact on the character of the area. As previously, parking provision would be made in the form of the underground car park, albeit its layout is now different. The depth of the basement level would be a maximum 1m lower than that of the approved scheme; and the access would be arranged via a ramped driveway instead of a car lift. As a result, there would be no surface parking on site, which could have potentially resulted in an adverse visual impact associated with the proportion of hardstanding areas on site.

35. The layout of the access ramp was amended during the course of the application due to the safety of the access and egress from the site. A further revision of the ramp design was made in order to retain the two pine trees near the east boundary with Gower Lodge. Third parties were re-consulted on these changes. A ‘priority entry’ system has been endorsed by the SCC Highway Authority, which allows a priority for cars entering the site over the cars leaving the building. This would ensure that there are no cars waiting on Gower Road, potentially causing a highway safety situation. Comments of some of the neighbouring residents with regards to

the preferred access from Old Avenue are noted, however, the existing vehicular access is from Gower Road and this would be utilised as part of the scheme. Therefore, the proposed access arrangements are not considered to result in any adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area. Highway implications are discussed below.

36. In comparison with the consented scheme 2015/2833, the habitable accommodation would be laid out over 5 floors as previously. Removal of the accommodation from the lower ground floor is a significant change, as all apartments would be now above the ground level. The overall proportions of the building have been retained as per the approved scheme, which was achieved by the aforementioned height reductions of each floor; and by lowering of the ground floor by 1m when compared with the natural ground level. The separation distances

37. The third and fourth floors would be set back from the south/Gower Road building frontage by 3.8m and 7.5m respectively. The pedestrian access to the building would be also provided within this elevation in the form of a three floor height portico style entrance. This elevation would contain several balconies above the ground floor. The breath of both, this and the Old Avenue elevations, would be broken up by various setback features and balconies. Further interest to the façade of the building would be achieved by the variation of the external materials, which would include predominantly brick with limited areas of render, reconstituted stone of Portland stone appearance and white painted fenestration details. The north and east elevations towards Ormonde Place and Gower Lodge respectively would include oblique windows, which would further break up the building’s scale.

38. The third floor would maintain a minimum of 16.9m from the side wall of Ormonde Place, with the fourth floor being set in a distance in excess of 27m. The height of the third floor would broadly match the height of Ormonde Place and as the top floor would be set considerably away from this neighbouring property, it is not considered that the proposed building would result in any adverse overbearing impact. The maximum height of the proposed building would match that of Gowers to the south, across Gower Road, which is due to the sloping ground levels towards the application property. The separation distance between the two would be approximately 40m. Based on the above assessment and due to the maintained separation distance in excess of 10m from the Old Avenue boundary, it is not considered that the proposal would result in any adverse overbearing or dominating visual impact within the Old Avenue street scene.

39. The overall height of the proposed building would be higher than that of Gower Lodge, the neighbouring property to the east. The minimum separation distance between their side walls would be approximately 9.4m. The top two floors, which protrude beyond the height of Gower Lodge would be set back by approximately 12.7m and 16m respectively. Due to these separation distances and the overall layout of the proposed development, this is not considered to result in any detrimental overbearing impact within the Gower Road street scene.

40. The appearance of the proposed replacement building is contemporary with a set of flat roofs; glass or metal railings/Portland stone feature balconies; utilising the traditional brick and stone detailing. The proposed external materials are commonly found in the locality and whilst the majority of the properties in the vicinity have pitched or crown roofs, the proposed design is not considered to adversely harm the character of the surrounding area.

41. Whilst the scale, bulk and massing of the replacement building on the application site would be greater than that it replaces, due to the maintained separation distances to the site’s boundaries and to the neighbouring properties; and due to its appearance incorporating a staggered design of top floors, the proposed development is considered to integrate into the surrounding area in a sympathetic manner.

42. The proposed external materials include red face brickwork; columns, porticos, window and door surrounds, bands and parapets in Portland stone appearance. Whilst these are considered acceptable in principle, it is considered that sufficient details have not been provided to ascertain the final appearance of the development. To ensure the implementation of the development using appropriate external materials, a relevant condition could be imposed. The same applies to the soft and hard landscaping details.

Impact on residential amenities

43. The Inspector in his reasoning (ref. 2011/5485) states that ‘the presence of an almost blank 3 storey end elevation so close to the boundary would result in it appearing oppressive and overbearing from a number of the Ormonde Place apartments and their small, sole private external amenity spaces.’ In that proposal, the relevant/north elevation was set 2.3m from the boundary with Ormonde Place. The approved scheme retained a minimum separation of 8.1m. This elevation contains a number of windows and setbacks in addition to the variation in the external materials, all of which add architectural interest to the building. Furthermore, the first and second floor oblique windows would ensure that no adverse overlooking and loss of privacy to the occupiers of Ormonde Place would occur. Windows within this elevation at the fourth floor would be set at a distance of 18.6m from the north boundary, which is considered sufficient as not to result in any detrimental overlooking and loss of privacy. There are a few balconies facing Ormonde Place with their side elevations. The implementation of balcony screens could be secured by way of relevant condition to ensure no overlooking and loss of privacy to the occupiers of the above neighbouring apartment building. Based on the above, the proposed building is not considered to result in any adverse loss of amenities to the neighbouring occupiers to the north.

44. The rear section of east elevation facing Gower Lodge would contain several windows and balconies but would be staggered away from the above neighbouring building. The approximate minimum separation distances to the east/side boundary of the application site from the flank windows would be maintained at 14.7m, 14.7m, 15.5m and 14.7m at first, second, third and fourth floor levels respectively. These distances are considered sufficient as not to result in any detrimental overlooking and loss of privacy to the above neighbouring property. Balconies would maintain approximate distance of 10m to the east/side boundary and therefore balcony screens could be requested to protect privacy of the neighbouring residents. There would be an accessible flat roof at the fourth floor level, a section of which would be used as a balcony. The east/side section of this roof is indicated for a maintenance access only and contains a balcony screen to its northeast corner.

45. Due to the siting of the building, separation distance from and its orientation to the west of Gower Lodge, the proposed development is not considered to result in any adverse loss of light to the above neighbouring property.

46. The other properties located across the roads are not considered adversely affected by the proposal due to their layout and separation distances from the proposed development.

47. The proposal incorporates areas between the building and Ormonde Place, Old Avenue and Gower Road, which would be laid to lawn and could be used by the future occupiers as an informal communal garden space. All apartments comply with the nationally set technical minimum space standards.

48. Based on the above assessment and subject to the relevant conditions, the proposal is not considered to result in any detrimental loss of amenities to the existing neighbouring residents or the future occupiers of the development.

Impact on highway, including access and parking

49. The proposal utilises the existing vehicular access point from Gower Road. The on-site basement parking is proposed at a rate of 2 spaces per unit with 15 additional spaces being provided. A considerable number of the received representations are concerned with inadequate parking provision and the aggravation of the existing on street parking problems. However, as the level of the proposed parking provision exceeds the adopted maximum parking standards, this provision would enable the protection of residential and visual amenities of the surrounding area and therefore is considered acceptable in this instance. Provision of 28 cycle parking spaces is also proposed, as indicated on the proposed underground car park plans.

50. County Highway Authority (CHA) has undertaken an assessment in terms of the likely net additional traffic generation, access arrangements and parking provision and is satisfied that subject to conditions the application would not have a material impact on the safety and operation of the adjoining public highway.

51. Following the submission of the amended plans, the CHA raised concerns regarding the access to the site. There was a risk that vehicles waiting to access the site could be forced to wait either on the footway or carriageway of Lincoln Road while other vehicles exited. The Applicant has since amended the on-site signage to give priority to vehicles accessing the site, this will mean that any queues that could form would be within the site, rather than on the public highway. Given the likely users of the on-site car park, and the amount of use expected considering the land use, the CHA considers that this risk is sufficiently low so as not to be likely to occur. Therefore, the amended plans are considered acceptable and no further objections are raised. The County Highway Authority seeks to impose relevant conditions and an informative in order not to prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users.

Impact on biodiversity & Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area

Impact on biodiversity

52. Ecological Survey and Bat Survey Addendum Survey by Clarkson & Woods Ecological Consultants were submitted with the application. These conclude that no bats were recorded emerging from the building during the emergence survey. Low numbers of foraging/commuting bats were incidentally recorded around the site. All trees that are to be removed under the current proposals had negligible potential to support roosting bats. One tree on site was identified to hold potential roosting features, but this tree will be retained under the current proposals. Recommendations to mitigate the potential impact of the development on bats have been made. These include principles that external lighting on site should adhere to in order to minimise unnecessary light pollution around habitats that are suitable for bats, and the planting of new trees and wildlife friendly hedgerow in order to increase the value of the foraging habitat on site.

53. It is considered that the relevant condition associated with the above would ensure compliance with the planning policy (revised NPPF para 8c) and chapter 15) and the other relevant legislation, including the Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (ODPM 06/2005). Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area

54. The application site lies within the 5km buffer zone of the Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area. To mitigate the impact of the additional residential occupancy within the buffer zone, the applicant is required to enter into a legal agreement to secure a financial contribution towards the Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM). A satisfactory legal agreement has been provided. Flooding and SuDS

55. The application site lies within Flood Zone 1, which benefits from less than 1 in 1000 annual probability of river flooding. Whilst the proposal is for a residential use, which is classified as ‘more vulnerable development’, as the site lies within Flood Zone 1, in accordance with the NPPF, no sequential or exception test for the development is required.

56. Following the introduction of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, Government announced on 18 December 2014, that Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) would be delivered for all major development through the planning system as of 6 April 2015. Planning Practice Guidance was also amended to reflect the requirement for a provision of SuDS (para 051). The proposed development needs to take into account different factors including the layout of the site, topography and geology. When the recent planning application ref. 2015/2833 was considered, the SCC LLFA (Local Lead Flooding Authority) were satisfied that

the proposed infiltration SuDS were appropriate for this site. When considering the current scheme, they require further information, however confirmed that this could be provided post-decision if secured by condition. As such, a relevant condition would be imposed.

57. A limited proportion of the application site (approximately 170sqm – the hardstanding to the front of the existing garages) has a low annual probability (1 in 1000) of surface water flooding. This hardstanding would be replaced by soft landscaping, whereby the infiltration would alleviate the existing low potential for surface water flooding. In conclusion, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in any adverse flooding implications on or off site.

Financial considerations

New Homes Bonus

58. Section 70 subsection 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) states that any local financial considerations are a matter to which local planning authorities must have regard to in determining planning applications; as far as they are material for the application. The weight to be attached to these considerations is a matter for the Council.

59. The New Homes Bonus is a grant paid by central government to local councils for increasing the number of homes and their use. The New Homes Bonus is paid each year for 4 years. It is based on the amount of extra Council Tax revenue raised for new-build homes, conversions and long-term empty homes brought back into use. There is also an extra payment for providing affordable homes. The New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination for 2018/19 is £1.1 million.

60. Local financial considerations are defined as grants from Government or sums payable to the authority under the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This means that the New Homes Bonus is capable of being a material consideration where relevant. In the current case, the approval of the application would mean that the New Homes Bonus would be payable for the net increase in dwellings from this development.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

61. The proposed development is liable for CIL. The applicant has provided the relevant liability forms required to pay the chargeable amount required by the Council’s adopted Charging Schedule. Pre-commencement conditions

62. The agent confirmed their agreement to the pre-commencement conditions associated with the

SuDS Design, Construction Transport Management Plan, Additional Tree Information and Pre-commencement Inspection, and Potential Land Contamination. Matters raised in Representations

63. The issues raised have been addressed in the planning considerations above. However, the

outstanding matters are discussed below:

• Objection in connection with the underground parking being unacceptable due to the high water table in this area was submitted. The application site does not lie in a flood zone; and the limited area affected by low risk of surface water flooding has been considered by the SCC LLFA.

• The proposed development would be subject to a contribution towards CIL. Money collected in this way is used to improve the infrastructure in the Borough.

• The location of the proposed bin store is similar to that of the approved scheme.

• The consultation for all applications is carried out in accordance with the provisions of Section 15 of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015. In this particular case, all the adjoining owners/occupiers were given a notice by way of a neighbour notification letter with further letters being sent to those local residents who expressed their interest by sending the LPA their views on the previous proposals relating to this site. A site notice was also placed adjacent to the application site and an advertisement published in the local newspapers.

• While the concerns of the local resident in terms of the disruption that may be caused by the construction works are noted, it is not the planning system’s role to obstruct development on this basis. Inevitably, any construction works may lead to some temporary disruption. Ordinarily, the requirements of Environmental Health legislation will seek to limit any harm so far as reasonably practicable. A standard informative would be added to permissions to draw this matter to the attention of the applicant.

Conclusion

64. On the basis of the above, and in light of any other material considerations, the proposal is

considered in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, the recommendation is to grant permission.

The proposed development does require a CIL payment

Recommendation: Grant Permission

Conditions/Reasons 1 TIME LIMIT (FULL APPLICATION)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 51 of Part 4 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following list of approved plans:

MRP/1701/P/01 - Site Location Plan; MRP/1701/P/11 Rev A - First Floor Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/12 Rev A - Second Floor Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/13 Rev A - Third Floor Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/14 Rev A - Fourth Floor Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/15 Rev A - Roof Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/16 Rev A - Underground Car Park Plans As proposed; and MRP/1701/SK/P/17 - Proposed Site Plan, all received on 26/02/2018;

ADC1856-DR-002 Rev P2 - Ramped Access Layout with Signage received on 16/08/2018;

MRP/1701/P/10 E Ground Floor Plan & Site Plan As proposed; MRP/1701/P/20 A Elevations As Proposed - Sheet 1 of 3; MRP/1701/P/21 A Elevations As Proposed - Sheet 2 of 3; MRP/1701/P/22 A Elevations As Proposed - Sheet 2 of 3; MRP/1701/P/30 B Sections As Proposed - Sheet 1 of 4; MRP/1701/P/31 B Sections As Proposed - Sheet 2 of 4; MRP/1701/P/32 A Sections As Proposed - Sheet 3 of 4; and MRP/1701/P/33 A Sections As Proposed - Sheet 4 of 4,

all received on 02/11/2018;

Tree Protection Plan (November 2018) received on 15/11/2018.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner. 3 MATERIALS SAMPLES

No development above the ground level shall take place until samples of the materials to be used on the external faces and roof of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the borough council. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory external appearance is achieved of the development in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the use of satisfactory external materials goes to the heart of the planning permission.

4 POTENTIAL LAND CONTAMINATION To ensure the potential for contamination has been investigated and the necessary

action taken to make the development site suitable for its proposed use, the following steps must be completed to the satisfaction of the Council. No demolition, site clearance or construction shall be commenced until step (a) has been completed by a competent person. If part (a) identifies the need for steps (b) and (c), then these shall also be completed before any site clearance, demolition or construction commence. Furthermore, there shall be no occupation of any part of the site by any end user prior to meeting the terms of this condition in full.

a) Preliminary Investigation of the Site

A preliminary investigation shall be carried out by a competent person prior to any site clearance or demolition, to assess the condition of the land to be re-developed, in respect of contamination. The preliminary investigation must, as a minimum, include a desk-based evaluation, site walkover, asbestos assessment of the existing buildings and Conceptual Site Model and may include intrusive investigation. A written report of the investigation shall be submitted to the Council for written approval. If the Council are satisfied that there is a significant possibility that the site could pose a significant risk to future occupiers under its proposed redevelopment use as a result of contamination, then the following additional steps shall also be carried out.

b) Asbestos survey If asbestos is identified in the desk study, an intrusive demolition asbestos survey in accordance with HSG264 supported by an appropriate mitigation scheme to control risks must be carried out. The scheme must be written by a suitably qualified person and shall be submitted to the LPA prior to commencement to demolition. The scheme as submitted shall demonstrably identify potential sources of asbestos contamination and detail removal or mitigation appropriate for the proposed end use. Detailed working methods are not required but the scheme of mitigation and confirmation of compliance with this shall be independently verified prior to demolition. The enforcing authority with regard to asbestos on a demolition or construction site is the Health and Safety Executive.

c) Site Investigation, Method Statement and Remediation (i) A written site specific investigation plan using the information obtained from the preliminary

investigation, providing details of the investigation for soil, gas and controlled waters where appropriate, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

(ii) The site investigation shall be undertaken in accordance with the scheme agreed by the Borough Council. The results of the site investigation, a refined conceptual model and a risk assessment of any contamination found shall be submitted in writing to, and approved by, the Council.

(iii) A written Method Statement detailing any remediation requirements shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

d) Development in accordance with the Method Statement The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement, and any addenda submitted by the developer, and agreed in writing by the Borough Council. Any post remediation monitoring identified in the Method statement, shall be installed by the developer within the timescales identified in the Method Statement and maintained and operated for as long as identified by the Method Statement. Reason: This needs to be a pre-commencement condition in order to avoid adverse effects from pollution on the environment, harm to human health or general amenity, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM5 of the Development Management Plan 2015.

e) Unsuspected Contamination

If, during development, contamination not previously identified, is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and had approved by the Council, a written addendum to the Method Statement detailing how the unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

f) Piling Development approved by this permission shall not commence unless the method for piling foundations (if piling is to be used on site) has been submitted to, and agreed in writing, by the Borough Council. The piling shall be undertaken only in accordance with the approved method.

g) Imported Material Clean, uncontaminated rock, soil, brick rubble, crushed concrete or ceramic only shall be permitted as infill material. The developer shall not import any material until a sampling program, including appropriate import criteria for the proposed end use and frequency of sampling, has been submitted in writing, and approved by, the Council. The Developer shall carry out the approved sampling program to check that all imported material conforms to the agreed criteria. Where the permitted end use is residential, the sampling program shall also include samples taken from the imported material after final placement. Written confirmation of the suitability of all imported materials shall be provided to the Council as part of step (g). This shall include both the results of the sampling program and also details of the origin, transport, final deposition and any temporary stockpiling of the imported materials.

h) Completion of Remediation and Verification Report Verification by an independent, competent person must be carried out prior to occupation of any part of the site by any end user. Upon completion of the remediation detailed in the Method Statement, and before occupation of any part of the site by any end user, a written Verification Report shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council providing verification that the required works regarding decontamination and installation of post remediation monitoring, have been carried out in accordance with the agreed Method Statement and any addenda thereto. The verification shall be carried out and reported by an independent, competent person, stating that remediation was carried out in accordance with the approved remediation scheme and that the site is suitable for the permitted end use. Reason: To avoid adverse effects from pollution on the environment, harm to human health or general amenity, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

5 SUDS DESIGN

The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of the design of a surface water drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority. The design must satisfy the SuDS Hierarchy and be compliant with the national Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS, NPPF and Ministerial Statement on SuDS. The required drainage details shall include:

a) The results of infiltration testing completed in accordance with BRE Digest: 365 and confirmation of groundwater levels.

b) Evidence that the proposed solution will effectively manage the 1 in 30 & 1 in 100 (+40%) allowance for climate change storm events and 10% allowance for urban creep, during all stages of the development (Pre, Post and during), associated discharge rates and storages volumes shall be provided using a Greenfield discharge rate as agreed by the LPA.

c) Detailed drawings to include: a finalised drainage layout detailing the location of SuDS elements, pipe diameters, levels, details of how SuDS elements will be protected from root damage and long and cross sections of each SuDS element including details of any flow restrictions and how they will be protected from blockage.

d) Details of how the runoff (including any pollutants) from the development site will be managed during construction.

e) Details of Management and Maintenance regimes and responsibilities for the drainage system. f) A plan showing exceedance flows and how property on and off site will be protected.

Reason: This needs to be a pre-commencement condition in order to ensure that the final drainage design is incorporated during the construction phase of the development and effectively prevents increase in flood risk on or off site in line with requirements of Policy CS26 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011, Flood Risk SPD 2016 and the revised NPPF 2018.

6 CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT PLAN

No development shall commence until a Construction Transport Management Plan, to include details of:

(a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors (b) loading and unloading of plant and materials (c) storage of plant and materials (d) programme of works (including measures for traffic management) (e) provision of boundary hoarding behind any visibility zones (f) measures to prevent the deposit of materials on the highway (g) before and after construction condition surveys of the highway and a commitment to fund the

repair of any damage caused (i) on-site turning for construction vehicles

has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction of the development.

Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with Policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the demolition and construction works could have implications on highway safety and amenity and should be agreed before any works begin.

7 ADDITIONAL TREE INFORMATION AND PRE-COMMENCEMENT INSPECTION

No development shall take place until further arboricultural details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Borough Council and these works shall be carried out as approved. This scheme shall include details of:

a) the measures taken to protect existing trees and hedges during construction, demolition, and delivery of materials / machinery, including a tree protection plan and an arboricultural method statement in line with BS5837:2012.

b) the scheme shall pay particular attention to providing methodologies and specifications for the installation of no-dig construction and operations inside RPAs, and the locations of any new services proposed.

c) prior to the commencement of works on site and after the installation of the tree protection in accordance with (a) above the applicant shall arrange a pre-commencement meeting between the Borough Council and the applicant's project arboriculturist to allow inspection and verification of the protection measures.

Reason: This permission is granted on the basis that the trees would remain on site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015. It is considered necessary for this to be a pre-commencement condition because the demolition

and construction works could have implications for the future health and amenity of retained trees within the site.

8 TREE PROTECTION

In this condition "retained tree" means an existing tree, which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b) below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the first occupation of the development.

a) no retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Borough Council. Any pruning shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (tree work) and in accordance with any supplied arboricultural method statement.

b) if any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Borough Council.

c) tree protection shall be maintained in-situ and not moved or removed until all construction has finished and equipment, materials, or machinery are removed from site.

d) any arboricultural protection information and plans submitted as part of the application, and listed in the approved plans condition, or submitted to meet a condition of consent shall be implemented and adhered to at all times during the construction process unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Borough Council. This shall include any requirement for arboricultural supervision and site monitoring. This condition may only fully be discharged on completion of the development subject to satisfactory written evidence of contemporaneous supervision and monitoring of tree protection throughout construction by the appointed arboriculturist.

Reason: This permission is only granted on the basis that the trees would remain on site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

9 BIODIVERSITY MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT MEASURES

The mitigation of any impacts on biodiversity including the protected species, and the enhancement measures, should be carried out in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 6 of the Ecological Survey produced by Clarkson & Woods Ecological Consultants dated April 2018 received on 06/04/2018; and in Section 6 of the Bat Survey Addendum Report by Clarkson & Woods Ecological Consultants dated June 2018 received on 04/07/2018. Reason: To ensure protection of the protected species in accordance with Policy CS15 of the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011, Policy DM21 of the Development Management Plan 2015 and the revised NPPF 2018.

10 LANDSCAPING - SCHEME AND IMPLEMENTATION

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the borough council and these works have been carried out as approved. This scheme shall include indications of all hard surfaces, walls, fences, access features, the existing trees and hedges to be retained, together with the new planting to be carried out. Any trees or plants, which within a period of five years of the commencement of any works in pursuance of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced as soon as practicable with others of similar size and species, following consultation with the borough council, unless the borough council gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

11 LANDSCAPING - TREE PLANTING AND AFTERCARE

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until full details of all proposed tree planting, the proposed times of planting, and arrangements for aftercare over a

period of 5 years have been approved in writing by the Borough Council. All tree planting and aftercare shall be carried out in accordance with those details and at those times. If within a period of five years from the date of the planting of any tree, that tree, or any planted in replacement for it, is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree of the same species and size as that originally planted shall be planted in the same place, unless the Borough Council gives its written consent to any variation.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

12 BALCONY SCREENS

The following balconies shall be provided with a screen to their north elevation towards Ormond Place: - balcony serving 2-bed flat (124.5sqm) at the first floor; - balcony serving 3-bed flat (165.3sqm) at the first floor; - balcony serving 2-bed flat (124.5sqm) at the second floor; - balcony serving 3-bed flat (159.5sqm) at the second floor; - balcony serving 2-bed flat (124.5sqm) at the third floor; and - balcony serving 3-bed flat (159.5sqm) at the third floor Details of the screen shall be submitted and approved in writing by the LPA. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and maintained permanently in strict accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To preserve the privacy of neighbouring residents in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

13 PARKING AND TURNING

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans for vehicles and cycles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. Thereafter the parking and turning areas shall be retained and maintained for their designated purposes. All cycle parking shall be secure, covered and lit.

Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with Policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

14 VISIBILITY ZONES

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the proposed vehicular access to Gower Road has been constructed and provided with visibility zones in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter the visibility zones shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction over 1.05m high.


15 ACCESS FROM OLD AVENUE

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the existing access from the site to Old Avenue has been permanently closed and any kerbs, verge, footway, fully reinstated.


16 FLAT ROOF - NO OTHER USE The flat roofs at the third floor level to the north and east annotated 'flat roof' of the development hereby permitted shall not at any time be altered or adapted to form a balcony, roof garden or similar amenity area without the grant of a further specific permission from the Borough Council.

Reason: To prevent undue loss of privacy to adjacent properties contrary to Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 and the Elmbridge Design and Character SPD 2012.

17 VERIFICATION REPORT (SUDS)

Prior to the first occupation of the development, a verification report carried out by a qualified drainage engineer must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the Drainage System has been constructed as per the agreed scheme.

Reason: To ensure the Drainage System is designed to the National Non-Statutory Technical Standards for SuDS.

Informatives 1 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY

The development permitted is subject to a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) liability for which a Liability Notice will be issued as soon as practical after the day on which planning permission first permits development.

To avoid breaching the CIL regulations and the potential financial penalties involved, it is essential a prior commencement notice be submitted. The notice is available at www.planningportal.co.uk/cil

For the avoidance of doubt commencement of demolition of existing structure(s) covering any part of the footprint of the proposed structure(s) would be considered as commencement for the purpose of the CIL regulations.

2 NEW VEHICLE CROSSOVERS AND DROPPED KERBS The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway. The applicant is advised that prior approval must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, or verge to form a vehicle crossover or to install dropped kerbs. Visit www.surreycc.gov.uk/droppedkerb

3 OTHER WORKS TO THE HIGHWAY The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out any works on the highway or any works that may affect a drainage channel/culvert or water course. The applicant is advised that a permit and, potentially, a Section 278 agreement must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway. All works on the highway will require a permit and an application will need to submitted to the County Council's Street Works Team up to 3 months in advance of the intended start date, depending on the scale of the works proposed and the classification of the road. Please see http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/road-permits-and-licences/the-traffic-management-permit-scheme. The applicant is also advised that Consent may be required under Section 23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991. Please see www.surreycc.gov.uk/people-and-community/emergency-planning-and-community-safety/flooding-advice.

4 ADVICE TO DEVELOPERS REGARDING CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENTS

Before carrying out any contamination investigation or remediation of a site, the developer is strongly recommended to contact the Environmental Health & Licensing Team for guidance on the requirements for such investigations or remediation. Investigations, in particular, which do not adequately fulfil these recommendations, may result in additional work having to be carried out.

5 WASTE COMMENTS (THAMES WATER) With regard to surface water drainage, Thames Water would advise that if the developer follows the sequential approach to the disposal of surface water we would have no objection. Where the developer proposes to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames Water Developer Services will be required. Should you require further information please refer to our website: https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing -a-Iarge-site/ Apply-and-pay-for-services/Wastewater-services

6 PROXIMITY TO THAMES WATER UNDERGROUND ASSETS The proposed development is located within 15m of Thames Waters underground assets, as such the development could cause the assets to fail if appropriate measures are not taken. Please read our guide on working near our assets to ensure your workings are in line with the necessary processes you need to follow if you're considering working above or near our pipes or other structures. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing -a-Iarge-site/PIanning-your-development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes. Should you require further information please contact Thames Water. Email: [email protected] Phone: 08000093921 (Monday to Friday, 8am to 5pm) Write to: Thames Water Developer Services, Clearwater Court, Vastern Road, Reading, Berkshire RG1 8DB

7 PETROL/OIL INTERCEPTORS Thames Water would recommend that petrol/oil interceptors be fitted in all car parking/washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of petrol/oil interceptors could result in oil-polluted discharges entering local watercourses.

8 IMPACT ON AN ORDINARY WATERCOURSE If proposed site works affect an Ordinary Watercourse, Surrey County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority should be contacted to obtain prior written Consent. More details are available on our website. If there are any further queries please contact the Sustainable Drainage and Consenting team via [email protected]. Please use our reference number (LLFA/EL/18/229) in any future correspondence.

LINCOLN COURT

ASHLEIGH

1 to 25

SELB

OR

NE

PLA

CE

LODGE

GOWERS

PREMAL JYOTI

CRAWFORDSBURNSUTHERLAND

1

GOWER HOUSE

1

ROTHSAY COURT

ORMONDE PLACE

OLD AVENUE

E G E R T O N R O A D

9

5

6

GOWER LODGE

5

O L

D A

V E

N U

E

G O W E R R O A D

GROVE HOUSE WARREN LODGE

1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING

Site Location Plan

1.1250 @ A4 25.01.18 MW

MRP/1701/P/01 _

Lincoln Court, Weybridge

STATUS

PLANNING APPLICATION

Surrey, KT13 0PH

scale bar in cm at full size A1

CHECKED

DRN CHK

MRP, Ground Floor,Innovation House,Apex Business Park,Ruddington Lane,Nottingham NG11 7DDTel: 0115 933 8471www.mrpdevelopments.com

Site Location Plan 1.1250 @ A4

Old Avenue No. 1 Ltd

LINCOLN COURT

ASHLEIGH

SELB

OR

NE

PLA

CE

LODGE

GOWERS

PREMAL JYOTI

1

GOWER HOUSE

1

ROTHSAY COURT

ORMONDE PLACE

OLD AVENUE

E G E R T O N R O A D

9

5

6

GOWER LODGE

5

O L

D A

V E

N U

E

G O W E R R O A D

GROVE HOUSE WARREN LODGE

1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING

Block Plan

1.500 @ A3 29.01.18 MW

MRP/1701/SK/P/17 _

Lincoln Court, Weybridge

STATUS


Surrey, KT13 0PH


CHECKED

DRN CHK

MRP, Ground Floor,Innovation House,Apex Business Park,Ruddington Lane,Nottingham NG11 7DDTel: 0115 933 8471www.mrpdevelopments.com

Block Plan 1.500 @ A3

OLD AVENUE

consented 15unit schemefloor heights

third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL

upper ground floor FFL

lower ground floor FFL

underside of roof

OLD AVENUE

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWER HOUSE OPPOSITE

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWERS OPPOSITE

Ridge

51.63

Ridge

50.59

Ridge

46.16

10

30

42

20

proposed revised28 unit scheme floor heights


third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



ground floor FFL

first floor FFL

second floor FFL

third floor FFL

fourth floor FFL

underside of roof (common to both designs)underside of roof

LINCOLN COURTOLD AVENUESELBORNE PLACE GOWER LODGE GARAGES

PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION (GOWER ROAD)

heavy red dotted line denotes elevationaloutline of 15 unitconsented schemeoverlaid onto revised28 unit schemedesign

TG TG

11325

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWER HOUSE OPPOSITE

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWERS OPPOSITE

TGTG TG TG

TGTG

24

75

Ridge

51.63

Ridge

50.59

Ridge

46.16

10

30

42

20

TG TG

TG TG

LINCOLN COURTOLD AVENUESELBORNE PLACE GOWER LODGE GARAGES

CONSENTED SOUTH ELEVATION (GOWER ROAD)5M0

proposed underground car parking using split- level arrangement

consented underground car parking using single- level arrangement

heavy red dotted line denotes elevationaloutline of 15 unitconsented scheme

assumed elevation of consented scheme lower floor duplex units - consented drawings show this level accommodation in plan and section only



third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



ground floor FFL

first floor FFL

second floor FFL

third floor FFL

fourth floor FFL


car lift access to car park

ramp access to car parkunderground car park

underground car park



lower floor of duplex units lower floor of duplex units


5M0

green dotted linedenotes profile of ground on consented scheme

proposed scheme ground profile revisedto have no worse impact on adjacent trees and their RPAs than the consented scheme

GENERAL NOTE:-

drawing revised following feedback received from council tree officer such that the extent of local ground re-modelling around the proposed building has been revised such that the extent of re-modelling is either:-

(i) no worse than the consented scheme, or

(ii) if slightly different to the consented scheme then outside of the nearest RPA zone

refer following revised sections and elevations for revised local ground re-modelling

revised sections:-

30 rev B, 31 rev B, 32 rev A, 33 rev A

revised elevations:-

20 rev A, 21 rev A, 22 rev A

1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING

Elevations As Proposed

1.200 @A1

January2018

MW

MRP/1701/P/20 A

Proposed Residential Development atLincoln Court, Weybridge,

Sheet 1 of 3

STATUS


Surrey, KT13 0PH


CHECKED

DRN CHK

Old Avenue No.1 Ltd

MRP, Ground Floor,Innovation House,Apex Business Park,Ruddington Lane,Nottingham NG11 7DDTel: 0115 933 8471www.mrpdevelopments .com

This drawing is copyright. Do not scale from this drawing.All dimensions to be checked on site and any discrepancy, error or omission reported to the architect.This drawing shall be read in conjunction with all relevant architects' and engineers' drawings and specifications.This drawing is for planning application purposes only and isnot intended to be used for construction purposes.

01.11.18drawing revised to takeaccount of Elmbridge BoroughCouncil tree officer comments

Rev A

Ridge48.21

PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION (OLD AVENUE)5M0

TGTG TG TG

TG TG

TGTG

TGTG

TGTG

TG

TG

1132

5

TG

TG

TG

2475

Parapet

46.59

Ridge48.11

1550

Ridge48.21

CONSENTED WEST ELEVATION (OLD AVENUE)5M0

TG

TG


proposed underground car parking using split- level arrangement



assumed elevation ofconsented scheme lowerfloor duplex units - consented drawings show this levelaccommodation in plan and section only

heavy green dotted line denotes elevationaloutline of existingbuilding


third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



underside of roof

heavy green dotted line denotes elevationaloutline of existingbuilding



third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



ground floor FFL

first floor FFL

second floor FFL

third floor FFL

fourth floor FFL


RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWER HOUSE

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWERS

Ridge51.63

Ridge50.59

1030

lower floor of duplex units





window shownwith increased height cills to minimise the need for ground remodelling


proposed scheme ground profile to match that of consented scheme

GENERAL NOTE:-





revised sections:-




1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING


1.200 @A1

January2018

MW

MRP/1701/P/21 A


Sheet 2 of 3

STATUS


Surrey, KT13 0PH


CHECKED

DRN CHK

Old Avenue No.1 Ltd




Rev A

PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION5M0

PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION5M0

TG

TG

TGTG TG TG

TG

11325

TG TG TG

TG

TG

TG

TGTG TGTGTGTG TG TG

TG

TG TG

11325

24

75

24

75

TG


third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



underside of roof



third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



ground floor FFL

first floor FFL

second floor FFL

third floor FFL

fourth floor FFL



third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



underside of roof



third floor FFL

second floor FFL

first floor FFL



ground floor FFL

first floor FFL

second floor FFL

third floor FFL

fourth floor FFL


CONSENTED EAST ELEVATION 5M0

CONSENTED NORTH ELEVATION 5M0




RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWER HOUSE

RIDGE HEIGHT OF GOWERS

Ridge

51.63

Ridge

50.59

10

30










car lift access to car park

ramp access to car park underground car park


TG


TG

TGTG


5 ground floor level windows adapted to incorporate increased cill height to minimise the need for ground remodelling

proposed scheme ground profile is minimally differentand is outside of the RPAs of adjacent trees to the north of the site

window cill heightraised





proposed scheme ground profile revisedto have no worse impact on adjacent trees and their RPAs than the consented scheme


GENERAL NOTE:-





revised sections:-




1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING


1.200 @A1

January2018

MW

MRP/1701/P/22 A


Sheet 3 of 3

STATUS


Surrey, KT13 0PH


CHECKED

DRN CHK

Old Avenue No.1 Ltd




Rev A

1 2 3 4 5 10

SCALE DATE

DRAWING No REVISION

DRAWN

REV AMENDMENTS DATE

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING

Ground Floor Plan & Site Plan

1.200 @A1

January2018

MW

MRP/1701/P/10 E


As Proposed

STATUS



Surrey, KT13 0PH


CHECKED

DRN CHK

Old Avenue No.1 Ltd


+38

.30

+38.3

0

+38

.05

+38

.05

+34.25

+34.2534.50+

34.50+

+36

.82

+36

.82

1:1

2 >

1:6

>

1:6

>

+35

.72

+35

.72

34

.97+

34

.97+

4.80m

4.80m

4.8

0m

2.60m

2.60m

5.00m

SC

SC

SC

SC

TP

RS

G

G

RWP

RWP

RWP

RWP

3D238.836

3D139.158

3D337.798

3D437.558

3D537.630

3D638.009

3D737.785

38.99

39.07

39.0239.10

38.87

38.91

38.82

38.87

38.89

38.97

39.06

39.11

39.19

39.27

39.32

39.08

39.12

39.08

39.13

39.25

39.1539.17

39.15

39.02

39.10

38.88

39.01

38.94

38.8638.88

38.79

38.57

38.08

37.89

37.70

37.89

38.04

38.08

38.06

38.77

38.1338.07

38.06

38.19

38.70

38.2938.23

38.1838.23

38.93

39.0539.16

39.05

38.84

38.54

38.84

38.71

38.66

38.85

38.75

38.30

38.23

38.26 38.04

38.04

38.05

38.03

38.0338.04

38.03

38.01

38.03

38.02

38.03

38.10

38.08

38.08

38.09

38.14

38.87

38.67

38.36

38.06

37.72

37.6137.55

37.55

37.55

37.56

37.55

37.54

37.49

37.60

37.87

38.28

38.82

38.67

38.37

38.02

37.73

37.59

37.60

37.51

37.42

37.48

37.43

37.65

37.4837.96

37.71

37.88

37.57

37.54

37.59

37.51

37.49

37.64

37.78

37.5737.54

37.46

37.40

37.35

37.3437.32

38.04

38.03

38.04

38.04

37.79

37.78

38.02

38.04

37.81 37.55

37.42

39

.03

38

.76

38

.36

38

.12

37

.94

37

.86

37

.57

37

.47

37

.23

37

.22

37

.54

37

.67

37

.91

38

.02

38

.19

38

.45

38

.85

39

.03

39.12

38.97

38.70

38.48

38.31

38.12

37.97

37.79

37.65

37.61

37.82

37.75

37.77

37.70

37.61

37.56

37.46

37.51

38.03

38.04

38.03

38.05

37.90

37.82

37.88

37.80

37.87

38.04

38.04

38.04

38.05

38.11

38.05

38.07

38.22

38.11

37.93

37.82

37.90

38.06

37.78

37.58

38.33

39.21

39

.09

38

.75

38.89

38.5538

.37

38

.06

38.26

37.9637

.76

37

.50

37.72

37.4837

.27

38.02

38.05

38.20

38.03

38.03

38.03

38.03

38.04

38.20

Brick 0.3h

WM

WO

WO

LLF

1.6

h

CP

CBF 1.6h

Eave

46.23

Eave

45.69Ridge

51.63

Ridge

50.14

Ridge

50.14

Ridge

50.59

Eave

42.87

Eave

44.51

Eave

42.92

Ridge

47.38

Ridge

46.86

Eave

44.42

Eave

43.02

Eave

45.46

Ridge

46.16

Ridge

46.12

Eave

42.91

Ridge

48.18

Ridge

48.10

Ridge

47.69

Ridge

48.21

Ridge

48.20

Ridge

47.29

Eave

43.26

Eave

43.30

Ridge

47.64

Eave

43.66

Ridge

47.63

Ridge

47.63

Eave

43.66

Eave

43.68

CP

CBF 1.8h

CBF 1.5h with Lattice 0.6hon top

Br

ic

k

1.

7

h

RNP

RNP

Brick 0.3h with IRF1.25h on top

Br

ic

k

1.

7

h

Brick 0

.3h w

ith

IR

F1.2

5h o

n top

Br

ic

k

2.

5

h

Brick 0

.3h w

ith

IR

F1.2

5h o

n top

Br

ic

k

1.

7

h

Br

ic k 1.

3 h

39.21

39.00

38.78

MH

CL 39.40

MH

CL 37.54

39.16

38.71

SP

0.65h

Ridge

40.08

Ridge

40.09

Ridge

40.08

Pa

rap

et

46.

60

Pa

rap

et

46.

59

IC

CL 38.03

IC

CL 38.03

IC

CL 38.03

IC

CL 37.86

BT

CL 38.93

BT

CL 39.09

BT

CL 39.17

FH

CL 39.19

BT

CL 39.10

BT

CL 38.17

MH

CL 39.50

Gower

Lodge

TarmacGrass

Grass

Grass

163900N

163880N

163860N

163840N

163820N

50

86

60

E

50

86

40

E

50

86

20

E

50

86

00

E

50

85

80

E

50

85

60

E

TREES GIVEN

PERMISSION TO BE

REMOVED IN

APPROVED SCHEME

TREES GIVEN

PERMISSION TO BE

REMOVED IN

APPROVED SCHEME

EXISTING ACCESS TO

BE RETAINED

TREE GIVEN

PERMISSION TO BE

REMOVED IN

APPROVED SCHEME

OUTLINE OF

EXISTING BUILDINGS

TO BE DEMOLISHED

OLD

AV

EN

UE

GOWER ROAD

EXISTING TREES TO

BE RETAINED

EXISTING TREES TO

BE RETAINED

EXISTING TREES TO

BE RETAINED

REFUSE STORE

37.47

refu

se

heavy blue dotted lines denote outline of buildings to be

demolished

420 [m]18 20161412106 8

AC

CE

SS

RA

MPLEVEL 'A'17 PARKING SPACES

PLANT

UP

CYCLES

STORAGEROOM

lift

lift

riser

roller shutter

5.113m

5.211m

39.0

39.0

39.0

38.0

38.0 38

.0

38.0

38.0

SC

SC

2xSC

SC

SC

TP

RS

G

G

RWP

RWP

RWP

RWP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

Tap

3D238.836

3D139.158

3D337.798

3D437.558

3D537.630

3D638.009

3D737.785

38.99

39.07

39.0239.10

38.87

38.91

38.82

38.87

38.89

38.97

39.06

39.11

39.19

39.27

39.32

39.08

39.12

39.08

39.13

39.25

39.1539.17

39.15

39.02

39.10

38.88

39.01

38.94

38.8638.88

38.79

38.57

38.08

37.89

37.70

37.89

38.04

38.08

38.06

38.77

38.1338.07

38.06

38.19

38.70

38.2938.23

38.1838.23

38.93

39.0539.16

39.05

38.84

38.54

38.84

38.71

38.66

38.85

38.75

38.30

38.23

38.26 38.04

38.04

38.05

38.03

38.0338.04

38.03

38.01

38.03

38.02

38.03

38.10

38.08

38.08

38.09

38.14

38.87

38.67

38.36

38.06

37.72

37.6137.55

37.55

37.55

37.56

37.55

37.54

37.49

37.60

37.87

38.28

38.82

38.67

38.37

38.02

37.73

37.59

37.60

37.51

37.42

37.48

37.43

37.65

37.4837.96

37.71

37.88

37.57

37.54

37.59

37.51

37.49

37.64

37.78

37.5737.54

37.46

37.40

37.35

37.3437.32

38.04

38.03

38.04

38.04

37.79

37.78

38.02

38.04

37.81 37.55

37.42

39

.03

38

.76

38

.36

38

.12

37

.94

37

.86

37

.57

37

.47

37

.23

37

.22

37

.54

37

.67

37

.91

38

.02

38

.19

38

.45

38

.85

39

.03

39.12

38.97

38.70

38.48

38.31

38.1

application no: application full type: wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21571/planning...

Documents