Agenda and minutes

All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter:

(i)            any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPIs) and / or

(ii)           other interests arising under the Code of Conduct

in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at the meeting. Anyone with a DPI must, unless a dispensation has been granted, withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the relevant item of business.  If in doubt, advice should be sought from the Monitoring Officer or his staff prior to the meeting.           

Councillor Bilton declared an interest in agenda item 4.1 (5 Narrow Lane, Warlingham, Surrey, CR6 9HY – minute number 202) on the basis that she knew the applicant. For this reason, Councillor Bilton agreed to leave the Council Chamber whilst the application was determined.

The minutes of the meeting were confirmed and signed by the Chair.

Before the Committee debated the item Councillor Bilton left the Council Chamber due to her previously declared interest in the application.

The committee considered an application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of 4 dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping.

The officer recommendation was to permit, subject to conditions.

Mrs Linda Dicker, an objector, spoke against the application.

Councillor Nathan Adams of Warlingham Parish Council spoke against the application.

Ms Hannah Staples, representing the applicant, spoke in favour of the application. 

Councillor Prew proposed the following three motions for refusal:

1.    The proposal would provide a shortfall in on-site parking which would not accord in full with the adopted Parking Standards SPD (2012) resulting in additional on-street parking which would cause congestion and harm to amenity of existing neighbouring residents and future residents of the proposed development. The proposal would be contrary to Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies 2014.

2.    The proposal, by reason of its scale, design and bulk would represent inappropriate back land development that would not be sympathetic to the local context and would result in overdevelopment and unacceptable intensification of the site. Furthermore, the proposal would fail to reflect the character and appearance of the site, street scene and surrounding area. This would be contrary to Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge Core Strategy 2008, Policies DP7 and DP8 of the Tandridge Local Plan: Part 2: Detailed Policies (2014).

3.    The proposal, due to the siting and proximity of the proposed building from neighbouring properties, would result in in overbearing effects, overlooking and a loss of privacy to neighbouring residential properties which would adversely impact on the amenities of the occupiers, thereby contrary to Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy (2008) and Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies (2014).

Councillors Steeds, Wren and Chotai seconded the motions.  Upon being put to the vote the motions were carried.

R E S O L V E D – that planning permission be refused.

Before the Committee debated the item Councillor Bilton returned to the Council Chamber.

The committee considered an application for the addition of 2 storeys of residential accommodation to an existing residential and commercial building to provide 7 new additional flats.

The officer recommendation was to refuse.

Kimberley Cherrie-Rees, an objector, spoke against the application.

Councillor Jeremy Webster of Caterham Valley Parish Council, spoke against the application.

Councillor Gaffney requested that the committee consider the following additional reason for refusal of the application:

The proposal would provide insufficient off-street parking to meet the requirements of the resultant dwellings at the site, leading to conditions prejudicial to the amenities of the immediate area, local residents and to the existing and future occupiers of the dwellings contrary to Policies CSP12 and CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy DPD 2008, Policies DP5 and DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: Detailed Policies 2014, Policy CCW5 of the Caterham, Chaldon and Whyteleafe Neighbourhood Plan 2021, the Council’s adopted Parking Standards SPD 2012 and The National Planning Policy Framework (2023).

The motion was proposed by Councillor Gray and seconded by Councillor Prew.  Upon being put to the vote the motion was passed.

R E S O L V E D – that the application be refused for the reasons set out in the report and with the additional reason for refusal added by the committee.

The committee considered an application for the conversion of a disused community space on the ground floor of a two storey block of flats into a two bedroom flat.

The Officered recommendation was to permit, subject to conditions.

            R E S O L V E D – that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

To receive a verbal update from officers relating to appeal decisions by the Planning Inspectorate resulting from previous committee decisions.

The committee received an update on the following appeal decisions:

TA/2021/2067 – 10 Westerham Road, Limpsfield, RH8 0ER.  The appeal was dismissed on 4 January 2024 (appeal reference: APP/M3645/W/23/3316608).

TA/2022/364 - Land to the west of Osney Lodge Farm, Byers Lane, South Godstone, RH9 8JH. The appeal was dismissed on 4 January 2024 (appeal reference: APP/M3645/W/22/3309535).