The meeting focused on planning applications and related issues. The most significant topic was the approval of a planning application for affordable housing, followed by the refusal of an application for entrance gates in a residential area.

Affordable Housing Development in Ripley

The committee discussed a planning application (22P01306) for the development of 25 affordable dwellings on land at the Former Highlands Nurseries, Portsmouth Road, Ripley. The proposal was presented by John Busher, who highlighted that the site is located within the Green Belt but meets the criteria for rural exception sites under policy H3 of the Local Plan. The development aims to provide affordable housing for local community needs.

Key Points:

• The site is currently vacant and overgrown.
• Surrey County Council withdrew their requirement for primary and secondary education contributions, now only seeking £26,000 for early years.
• The proposal includes 25 affordable dwellings, all to be secured as affordable rent.
• The development will retain existing mature trees and provide additional landscaping.
• The committee heard objections from local residents, including Callum Evans and Frederick Trodd, who raised concerns about Green Belt policy, flooding, and biodiversity.
• Support was voiced by Councillor Rowland Cornell from Ripley Parish Council and Adam Constantinou from PA Housing, emphasizing the local need for affordable housing.

Decision: The committee approved the application with 11 votes for and 2 against, subject to a section 106 agreement to secure the affordable housing and other contributions.

Refusal of Entrance Gates in Effingham

The committee discussed a planning application (24P00308) for the installation of metal gates and railings at the entrance of a new development at Orchard Walls, Beach Avenue, Effingham. The proposal was presented by Victoria Bates, who noted that the gates would be set back into the site and would not have an adverse impact on highway safety.

Key Points:

• The gates were proposed by the developer and not by the future residents, as the development is not yet occupied.
• Objections were raised by Councillor Meryl Rarehorse-Smith and the Effingham Parish Council, citing concerns about social divisiveness, impact on the conservation area, and the character of the area.
• The committee discussed the potential negative impact on social cohesion and the character of the street scene.

Decision: The committee refused the application with 12 votes for refusal and 1 against, citing reasons related to social divisiveness and the impact on the character of the conservation area.

Appeals

Councillor David Bilbai raised a point regarding the appeals list, specifically the case of Fox Hill Cottage, Hunts Hill Road. He highlighted the extensive process involving multiple appeals and a statutory review, which he deemed a waste of time and resources.

Key Points:

• The original application was refused but later allowed on appeal.
• A statutory review was sought, leading to a high court decision that bounced the case back to the inspectorate.
• The case went through multiple appeals, causing significant expenditure of time and resources.

The meeting concluded with a discussion on the appeals and the need for better use of residents' money in future planning decisions.