49 extra-care units at Loen, St Catherines Road, Frimley, Camberley

What was proposed

The application proposed 49 extra-care units, extensions to Loen House as a communal facility, landscaping, parking and improved access.

“SUMMARY 1.1 The application relates to the redevelopment of the site to provide 49 extra care units (Use Class C2) as part of an Integrated Retirement Community (IRC), with extensions to Loen House to facilitate a change of use of the building from a dwelling to a communal facility together with associated landscaping, parking and access.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a 1.85-hectare former dwelling site between Frimley and Deepcut, accessed from St Catherines Road and surrounded by woodland.

“The site is accessed via a private track off St Catherines Road to the west. Two other properties are accessed via this private road situated to the west of the site, whilst there is a residential property situated to the south east of the site. These properties consist of detached dwellings within sizeable plots.”

“The site falls within a flood zone 1, and none of the trees on the site are protected by tree preservation orders. The nearest convenience store is a Tesco Express located a 12-minute walk from the site. The No.12 bus which runs through Frimley and Camberely is located an 11-minute walk from the site whilst Frimley Rail station is a 28-minute walk.”

Officer report

Planning history

There was no relevant planning history beyond extensions to the main dwelling.

“RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 No relevant history. All history relates to extensions to the main dwelling. PROPOSAL”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered housing need, health and wellbeing, released homes, biodiversity and community facilities to outweigh countryside and tree-loss harm.

“The proposal would result in the release of 49 under-occupied homes back into the housing market, whilst there is a lack of policy strategy to address requirements for housing with care. Biodiversity net gain would be provided in excess of national requirements whilst the development would create amenity facilities on-site open to the public. These benefits also weigh in favour of the proposal.”

Officer report

Consultees’ views

Statutory consultees raised no objections overall, although the arboricultural officer objected in principle to tree loss.

“The following internal consultees were consulted, and their comments are summarised in the table below: Internal Consultation Comments received Arboricultural Officer Raise objection in principle to the loss of trees on site with added potential for risk of windthrow resulting in the erosion of the woodland setting. A woodland management plan and soft landscaping whilst acceptable in principle would not overcome the objection.”

“Officer response: The objection only considers the loss of trees solely from an arboriculturist perspective and does not take into account the wider planning position, nor the contribution of the mitigation off-site and overall gain. The site forms part of the Council’s 5-year housing land supply envisaging 60 units and therefore the loss of trees on this site is expected.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two speakers spoke against the application, one spoke in favour, and the ward member for Frimley addressed the committee.

Members’ questions

Members questioned wheelchair access, speed-check timing, traffic modelling, local road conditions, school journeys, the electric gate and SANG parking.

“What data (numbers) were entered into TRICS and TEMPro (and any other modelling software) for this development? • How are the results weighed against the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the emerging Surrey Heath Local Plan? • Exactly how is TRICS data obtained and what information it is based on? • Does the modelling take into account real-life information such as bus services, trains, and pinch points in local roads? • How often is this TRICS data updated? •…”

“Minutes\Planning Applications Committee\21 August 2025 • How do you respond to the 200+ local residents who have stated granting permission will jeopardise safety, particularly for school children? • Would removal of the proposed electric gate at the entrance improve road safety at the site? • Is it correct that the traffic data was collected in June, when Tomlinscote students’ use of the road was reduced due to exams? • Could two or three parking spaces for SANG visitors be…”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to approve the application subject to conditions and a legal agreement was carried unanimously.

“RESOLVED that application 24/0922/FFU be approved subject to conditions and a legal agreement.”

Minutes

Approval requirements

The legal agreement was to secure retirement-community eligibility, SAMM, travel-plan monitoring, biodiversity net gain and habitat-management monitoring.

“GRANT subject to a legal agreement securing the following heads of terms and conditions:”

“Eligibility criteria and provisions of the Integrated Retirement Community • Financial contribution towards SAMM. • Travel Plan auditing fee £5,000 • Biodiversity Net Gain • Habitat management monitoring plan and monitoring fee…”

Officer report