Littleworth Road
Claygate House № 4
2024
ADDRESS: 4 Littleworth Road
|
ADDRESS: 4 Littleworth Road
|
ADDRESS: 4 Littleworth Road
|
2021
The Clerk had received an update from EBC Planning on 2020/2095 - 4 Littleworth Road, Esher. Currently there are outstanding matters with regards to flood risk that the Environment Agency have requested additional information on and that has resulted in a delay in the determination of the application. It is not clear exactly when the application will come before the EBC Planning Committee as it depends on when the EA accepts the additional information. They are hopefully it will be in the next few months. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 25-FEB-21)
In addition to correspondence shared within APs and further down the agenda the Clerk had been copied in about a Sunday working complaint at the Claygate House development by a local resident. No action had been requested to CPC. Cllr Swift asked whether the revised COVID-19 regulations for construction allowing extended hours and days of working were still active. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 28-JAN-21)
- Claygate House, Littleworth Road, KT10 9PN — 2020/3310 — PROPOSAL: Confirmation of Compliance with Conditions: 7 (Electric Vehicle Parking Points) and parts c, d and f of Condition 16 (Potential Land Contamination) of planning permission 2018/3782. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: No Comment (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 5-JAN-21)
- Claygate House, Littleworth Road, KT10 9PN — 2020/3311 — PROPOSAL: Confirmation of Compliance with Condition 4 (Potential Land Contamination) of planning permission 2019/1047. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: No Comment (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 5-JAN-21)
| AP66 Cllr Sugden to send the Clerk full planning policy details to submit with the objection to Claygate House Planning application 2020/2095. DONE. Revised plans have been submitted primarily related to Flood Risk an Drainage which are covered under Item 7 below. Additional objection comments on these revisions to be submitted. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 5-NOV-20) |
- Claygate House, Littleworth Road KT10 9PN — 2020/2696 — PROPOSAL: Confirmation of Compliance with Condition: 13 (Trees Additional Arboriculture Information) of planning permission 2018/3782. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: No comment. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 5-NOV-20)
| 2020/2095 Claygate House. | |
| Two local residents submitted an objection statement for this meeting which was circulated by the Clerk prior to the meeting. They object to development on the grounds of over-dense development, overlooking neighbouring property, flood risk and excessive increase in traffic on Littleworth Road. A further local resident also submitted an objection statement for this meeting which was circulated by the Clerk prior to the meeting. The objection is on the grounds of over-dense development, design, landscaping, parking, infrastructure.
Cllr Sugden, Cllr Herbert and Cllr Lesser all declared that they knew one of the residents. A local resident spoke. He cited the development was over-dense. The original plan for this site was to convert the Claygate House Office block into 59 flats (2018/0291), increased to 67 in 2018/3259. A subsequent application (2018/3782) added an extra storey to the main block, giving a total of 82 residential units. In 2019 (2019/2134), permission was granted to demolish the Pavilion block and replace it with a new block of 39 flats and to add 11 town houses at the south end of the site. As there were originally to be only 9 flats in the Pavilion block, this represented a net increase of 41 units over previous plans. The current application apparently reduces the number of flats in the replacement Pavilion building to 13 but replaces the 11 town houses with a 4-storey block of 49 flats at the south end of the site. This represents a net increase of 53 units (65%) over application 2018/3782. No consideration appears to have been given to the impact on local services (especially schools and doctors) of such a large development. There would appear to be insufficient foul drainage capacity for the latest proposals, as para 5.13 of the Flood Risk Assessment indicates that local Thames Water sewers could accommodate 124 dwellings on the site; the proposed development brings the total to 135 units. The second reason for his objection was that the proposed South Block’s upper story windows look directly into the garden of “Harecroft”, Raleigh Drive. This is unacceptable and there are too many such windows for them all to be fitted with obscuring glass. Thirdly he cited flood risk and drainage. The proposed South Block would be located in the part of the site most vulnerable to flooding. Paras 3.16-19 of the Flood Risk Assessment make it clear that, while the proposed South Block flats would be unlikely to flood, at times of serious flooding of The Rythe occupants would have to wade through flood water to reach refuge areas at the northern end of the site. Para 3.9 admits that the most vulnerable flats would not meet the minimum freeboard requirement in a worst case climate change flood scenario. He wanted it noted that Surrey County Council are not satisfied with the proposed surface water drainage arrangements. He supported the provision of an improved grid for the Rythe culvert. He asked that, should the application be permitted, the site management company be required to 24/7 monitoring of the culvert entry grid, as was done by the previous tenants, Dairy Crest, supported by an Environment Agency camera. His finally reason for objection was traffic movement. He believes the TRICS data used in the Transport Statement to model vehicle movements for the existing office block is misleading. The TRICS data is based on averaged data for different classes of building in different areas. The results quoted suggest that the residential development will generate significantly less vehicle movements than the original office block. He suggested this may be misleading, as the office block was not fully occupied for some years before being sold, with many empty parking spaces visible around it during the working day. The vehicle movements for the office block should have been calculated on the number of employees actually based on the site, or the area of office space actually occupied by employees. In addition, the number of parking spaces the visitors have only been stated as 10. He believes it will be likely that visitor parking will overflow at peak weekend times into Littleworth Road, a practice regarded as unacceptable by the Transport Statement. It is also likely that the vast majority of the 196 residents parking spaces will be in use; and was sceptical of the analysis that concludes these spaces will only generate a maximum of 28 peak hour vehicle movements (Transport Statement para 5.20). Cllrs noted that if more than 15 households object the application it goes to the main EBC Planning Committee. In this instance the latest Claygate House planning application has received 34 resident objections so far. It was agreed to object based on planning policy:
It was also noted that the CPC should highlight that there is no commentary on telecommunications in the planning applications and that it appears that the Secure by Design has been set at the lowest grade possible. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 8-OCT-20) |
- Claygate House Littleworth Road KT10 9PN — 2020/2095 — PROPOSAL: Development comprising 62 flats with associated parking and landscaping following demolition of existing buildings. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: Object. Detail already covered off earlier in meeting. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 8-OCT-20)
The area
Flooding
| 5 | To discuss the EA Flood Action Campaign. |
| The Clerk circulated the EA Flood action plan to Committee members ahead of the meeting. The prime focus of the EA Flood Action plan is to raise awareness of flooding with the general public. EBC had actioned a full strategic review of the flood situation in Claygate in 2019. In this review Claygate was classed as low risk for flooding from rivers. The River Rythe had creating some fluvial flooding on Hare Lane and Raleigh Drive historically. The EBC review noted that there is a high risk of surface water flooding in Claygate. SCC have identified the following locations as susceptible to surface water flooding: Oaken Lane, Gordon Road, The Avenue, The Parade, Foley Road, Church Road, Coverts Road, and Littleworth Road. It was noted that SCC had been actively clearing gullies in a number of problem roads over the winter period. In particular, the work that SCC had done in widening the gullies on Church Road by the bus stop, appeared to have been a success. SCC will still need to clear out the gullies each year due to leaves but once cleared the gullies should function correctly and Church Road
should remain flood free. Finally, it was noted that Claygate Centre on Elm Road was an Emergency Rest Centre in the event of a flooding incident. The CPC urged Claygate residents to move their cars on days that SCC are cleaning gullies to ensure SCC has the best chance in preventing surface water flooding. They asked that Raleigh Drive residents contact Thames Water in the event of flooding in that area as it was often relating to the pumping station by Hare Lane Green. CPC would continue to push that new developments in the area, such as Claygate House, are taking a proactive responsibility to protect the River Rythe area from future flooding and that they are doing their bit to maintain the river. The Committee agreed that EBC Strategic Flood review had identified the areas of concern and that CPC will continue to monitor the situation. The Clerk then updated the committee on the flooding under the railway bridge on the Bridleway South of the A3. Savills had informed her that they had Freeflow on site for three days pumping water from the underpass to try and clear the drain, however they were fighting a losing battle as the water was coming off the fields and into the underpass faster than we could pump it out. They’ve spoken to Surrey County Council and H&S signage has gone up for the time being to advise of deep water and blocked access. They will then need to revisit this in April/May once the winter rains have passed to pump the water away and then either clear the existing drain or look at alternative options of providing an outlet for the surface water run-off. Savills want CPC to be assured that it is something they are taking seriously and they are looking to find a long-term solution to. (PARISH COUNCIL HT&E MEETING 11-FEB-21) |
