Raleigh Drive

HINCHLEY WOOD
E	🏘️	🚂	🏘️	🌳	🌳	🌳	🌳	C
S	🟥	🟥	🏘️	🌳	🏘️	🌳	🌳	H
H	🌳	🚂	🛒	🛒	🏘️	🏘️	🏘️	E
E	🌳	🚂	🏘️	✞	🌳	🏘️	🏘️	S
R	🌳	🚂	🌳	🏘️	🌳	🌳	🚗	S
	🌳	🚂	🌳	🏘️	🚗	🚗	🌳	N
OXSHOTT

Planning Inspectorate Verdict: Appeal Ref: APP/K3605/W/23/3334391 — Land north of Raleigh Drive

• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Claygate House Investments Ltd and MJS Investments Ltd against the decision of Elmbridge Borough Council.
• The application Ref 2023/0962, dated 24 March 2023, was refused by notice dated 22 September 2023.
• The development proposed is an outline planning application for up to 60 dwellings, associated landscaping and open space with access from Raleigh Drive.

Decision

• The appeal is dismissed.

  source: Verdict on CPC website

---

PARISH COUNCIL ACHIEVEMENT 23RD MAY 2024: "Represented Claygate at the enquiry at EBC by the Planning Inspectorate into the application to build on the Green Belt: Land North of Raleigh Drive (2023/0962)."

PARISH COUNCIL ACHIEVEMENT 2ND APRIL 2024: "Liaised with EBC regarding Land North of Raleigh Drive to object to development on Green Belt Land—Planning Inspectorate Ref APP/K3605/W/23/33343391; Planning Application Reference 2023/0962."

---

LAND NORTH OF RALEIGH DRIVE

An outline plan to build up to 60 dwellings on Green Belt land north of Raleigh Drive reached the Planning Committee in May last year and the Parish Council objected, saying that approval would set a very dangerous precedent for other tracts of Green Belt in the village and borough. Elmbridge Borough Council gave four reasons for refusing the application, the first being Green Belt contravention.

The developer has subsequently appealed and the Parish Council has been advised that the more people showing their opposition, the more likely the appeal is to be rejected. The date of appeal hearing will be publicised as soon as it is available. The appeal will be conducted via videoconferencing software, so residents will not be able to attend in person but can be present online.

source: Claygate Courier, March 2024 issue, page 3

---

Harecroft

• Harecroft, Raleigh Drive KT10 9DE — 2020/1727 — PROPOSAL: Detached garage. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: Refused by EBC.

EBC refused permission on the grounds that:

• it does not allow for essential maintenance and emergency access to the River Rythe
• the Flood Risk Assessment submitted fails to demonstrate that the current proposal is safe, does not increase flood risk elsewhere, or that the proposed development will not constrain the natural function of the flood plain.

The Appellant claims that the Flood Risk Assessment has been clear about the way in which any potential flood risk has been mitigated within the construction detail of the building and highlighted:

• a major flood alleviation scheme was carried out in 2006 has drastically reduced the danger of flooding to a considerable number of dwellings in the Thames Ditton and Claygate area including Raleigh Drive.
• it would not have an adverse effect on a watercourse, flood plain or its flood defences.
• it would Impede access to flood defence and management facilities.
• it would not have a significant effect on local flood storage capacity or flood flows.
• the surface water would flow to the lower land on Hare Lane Green and not towards the application site or the residential properties.
• it is less likely that there would be a groundwater threat to the site because the subsoil lies on London Clay which has the effect of *capping" any rise in groundwater levels. Any fluvial flooding of the site would again fall towards Hare Lane Green. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 28-JAN-21)

• Harecroft, Raleigh Drive KT10 9DE — 2020/1727 — PROPOSAL: Detached garage. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: Refused by EBC.

EBC assessed that "By virtue of its siting within 8m from the main river, it does not allow for essential maintenance and emergency access to the River Rythe. Also, the Flood Risk Assessment submitted fails to demonstrate that the current proposal is safe, does not increase flood risk elsewhere, or that the proposed development will not constrain the natural function of the flood plain. The proposal has also failed to either address Climate Change or provide SuDs in the design. The proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2019, policy CS26 and Flood Risk SPD (adopted 2016)." (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 3-DEC-20)

• Harecroft Raleigh Drive KT10 9DE — 2020/1727 — PROPOSAL: Detached garage. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: No Comment. (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 8-OCT-20)

The Lodge № 33

• The Lodge 33 Raleigh Drive KT10 9DE — 2020/2275 — PROPOSAL: Part two/part single-storey side/rear extension and alterations to fenestration following partial demolition of existing house. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: Condition imposed.

EBC stated:

• “due to the siting and orientation of the plots and dwellings, as well as the presence of the detached garage at Hayes Barton, it is not considered that the proposal would result in a detrimental loss of light, over and above the existing situation. In addition, given that the proposal would not be sited directly opposite the habitable windows at Hayes Barton, there would not be a considerable change of outlook from the existing situation”
• “To protect the privacy of the occupiers of Hayes Barton, it is considered reasonable to impose a condition ensuring that no windows can be inserted in the side elevation towards this property without obtaining planning permission from the Borough Council.” (PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING 5-JAN-21)

• The Lodge 33 Raleigh Drive KT10 9DE — 2020/2275 — PROPOSAL: Part two/part single-storey side/rear extension and alterations to fenestration following partial demolition of existing house. — COUNCIL RESPONSE: No Comment. (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)