The South Area Planning Sub-Committee of Elmbridge Council is scheduled to meet on 8 October 2025 to discuss planning applications. The meeting will cover the conversion of an outbuilding into a house in Oxshott, and a rear dormer window in Weybridge.

Land North of 2 Littleheath Farm Cottage, Steels Lane, Oxshott

The committee will consider a planning application for the conversion of an existing detached outbuilding into a residential house, with associated external alterations and parking, on land north of 2 Littleheath Farm Cottage, Steels Lane, Oxshott. The applicant is Mr Richard Evans, and the agent is Mr Oliver Horne.

The application is before the committee due to the number of objections received.

The report pack notes that the application site is a 0.025 hectare plot of land to the rear of No.2 Littleheath Farm Cottages, and currently hosts a detached building with permission for use as a garage and greenhouse. Access to the site would be via a private track accessed from Steels Lane.

The site is within the COS09; Oxshott character area, as defined in the Cobham, Stoke D'Abernon, Oxshott and Downside Companion Guide to the Design and Character SPD.

Relevant planning constraints include:

• Flood Zone 1
• 400m - 5km buffer zone of the TBH SPA¹
• Within 20m of a watercourse

The report pack lists a number of local policies and guidance that are relevant to the determination of this application, including:

• Core Strategy 2011
  • CS1 – Spatial Strategy
  • CS10 – Cobham, Oxshott, Stoke D'Abernon and Downside
  • CS13 – Thames Basin Heaths 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
  • DM4 – Comprehensive development
  • DM5 – Pollution
  • DM6 – Landscape and trees
  • DM7 – Access and parking
  • DM8 – Refuse, recycling and external plant
  • DM10 – Housing
  • DM21 – Nature conservation and biodiversity
• Design Code 2024
• Development Contributions SPD 2021
• Flood Risk SPD 2016
• Parking SPD 2020

The report pack also details relevant planning history for the site, including:

• 2024/0851 - Conversion of existing detached outbuilding to create a residential house with associated external alterations and parking. This application was refused, and the appeal was dismissed.
• 2021/3332 - Conversion of detached garage and store to create additional residential unit with associated parking, front porch and alterations to fenestration. This application was refused, and the appeal was dismissed.
• 2021/0834 - Conversion of detached garage and store to create additional residential unit with associated parking and alterations to fenestration. This application was refused.
• 2020/3335 - Detached rear garage and greenhouse following demolition of existing stores. This application was withdrawn.
• 2020/1121 - Detached rear garage and greenhouse following demolition of existing stores. This application was granted permission.
• 2014/0235 - Lawful Development Certificate: Whether planning permission is required for a proposed two storey rear extension, single storey side extension, side windows and front, side and rear rooflights. This application was granted permission.

The reasons for refusal of application 2024/0851 included that the proposed development would fail to understand, respect, integrate with and make a positive contribution to the street scene and character of the area, and does not reflect the form or grain of existing development, and that the application had failed to demonstrate that the development would satisfy the exemptions to the requirement for Biodiversity Net Gain as required by the Environment Act 2021².

The reasons for refusal of application 2021/3332 included that the proposed development would result in a poor level of amenity for future occupiers, and fails to respect the character of the area, and that the submitted Flood Risk Assessment fails to demonstrate that the proposal is safe and does not increase flood risk elsewhere.

The consultations undertaken included Joint Waste Solutions, Natural England, Surrey Bat Group, Surrey Wildlife Trust, Surrey Highways and Surrey County Council Lead Local Flooding Authority.

27 letters of objection were received from 18 different addresses, and 13 letters of support were received from 12 addresses.

Objections included:

• Harm to character of the area
• Direct overlooking loss of privacy
• Visually intrusive
• Unacceptable living conditions for neighbours
• Concern over historic processes of applying for a garage first
• Prolonged community distress from the length of the process and repeated applications
• Misrepresentation of proximity to watercourse, correct consultee not undertaken, should be judicially reviewed
• Watercourse runs alongside the structure
• Site lacks permanent proper access, no pavement, no waste bin area, unsuitable for waste collection vehicle
• Too close to properties on Oxdowne Close and Clock House Mead
• Site history of 5 applications and two dismissed appeals
• Differences of opinion between appeal Inspectors
• Last Inspector didn't comment on watercourse
• Could cause future flooding
• Trees and hedging removed
• Exactly the same application as before
• Land too small for a dwelling
• Disruption during construction, access to garages blocked
• FRA out of date
• Application from changed answer to watercourse

Support included:

• Support the self-build proposal
• Inspector found reason for refusal invalid
• Project well thought outfits with surroundings and great opportunity for a selfbuild home
• Need for housing
• No visual impact on surrounding homes
• Reasonable for Elmbridge to permit application now after appeal
• Modest discrete affordable home
• Many examples of small properties being built in gardens
• Previous reasons for refusal addressed
• Not greenfield land
• Inspector has deemed it acceptable
• Cannot afford a cost application
• Flood Zone 1
• Fully support application

The main planning considerations in the determination of this application are listed as:

• The principle of development
• Housing mix, density and affordable housing
• The size, scale and design of the proposal and its impact on the character and appearance of the area and the streetscene
• The impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties
• The standard of accommodation for future occupiers
• The impact on highways safety and parking
• The impact on flooding
• The impact on trees and biodiversity
• Refuse storage and collection

The report pack states that the proposal would provide 1 x 2 bedroom self build dwelling, which is a housing type for which there is an identified need within the borough.

The report pack notes that there is no longer a requirement for an affordable housing payment to be made in respect of this application.

The report pack also notes that two planning inspectors have reached inconsistent conclusions on the impact of the proposal on the character of the area.

The report pack recommends that planning permission is granted, subject to conditions.

11 Hanger Hill, Weybridge

The committee will also consider a Lawful Development Certificate (LDC) for a rear dormer window incorporating juliet balcony and front rooflights to provide rooms in the roofspace at 11 Hanger Hill, Weybridge. The applicant is Dr Kate Brackenborough, and the agent is Mrs K Cowan.

The application comes before the South Area Planning Committee as the application is submitted by a person related to an 'Authority Employee / Member' of Elmbridge Borough Council as stated in the application form.

The application site is a two-storey mid-terrace dwellinghouse on east side of Hanger Hill, Weybridge.

The report pack notes one item of relevant planning history:

• WAL/1973/0122 - Erection of 16 houses 16 garages and formation of access road and 11 parking spaces - Granted

The application seeks a Lawful Development Certificate (LDC) for rear dormer window incorporating juliet balcony and front rooflights to provide rooms in the roofspace.

No consultations were undertaken, and no letters of representation have been received.

The report pack states that the proposed development constitutes permitted development under Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 1, Class B and C of the General Permitted Development Order 2015 (as amended) and complies with the criteria contained within the classes as set out in the LDC checklist.

The report pack recommends that a Lawful Development Certificate is granted.