Councillors and committees

Agenda and draft minutes

Planning and Regulatory Committee - Wednesday, 28 February 2024 10.30 am

Venue: Council Chamber, Woodhatch Place, 11 Cockshot Hill, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 8EF

Contact: Joss Butler  Email: joss.butler@surreycc.gov.uk

Media

Items
No. Item

1/24

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

    • Share this item

    To receive any apologies for absence and notices of substitutions under Standing Order 41.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    None received.

2/24

MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING pdf icon PDF 116 KB

    • Share this item

    To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 20 December 2023.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Minutes were approved as an accurate record of the previous meeting.

3/24

PETITIONS

    • Share this item

    To receive any petitions from members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 84 (please see note 5 below).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

4/24

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

    • Share this item

    To answer any questions received from local government electors within Surrey in accordance with Standing Order 85 (please see note 6 below).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

5/24

MEMBERS' QUESTION TIME

    • Share this item

    To answer any questions received from Members of the Council in accordance with Standing Order 68.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

6/24

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

    • Share this item

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

    (i)            Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or

    (ii)           Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting

    NOTES:

    ·         Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest

    ·         As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)

    ·         Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

7/24

Minerals/Waste EL2023/0344 - Silvermere Haven Pet Cemetery, Byfleet Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1DZ pdf icon PDF 965 KB

    • Share this item

    Demolition of existing crematorium buildings and removal of storage containers, temporary cabin and temporary cold store; and the construction of a new crematorium building incorporating chapels of rest, cremation hall and space for storage containers within storage yard, relocation of existing waste transfer facilities for hazardous and non-hazardous waste; and associated landscaping..

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Officers:

    Dawn Horton-Baker, Planning Development Team Leader

    James Lehahe, Principal Transport Development Planning Officer

     

    Officer Introduction:

     

    1. The Planning Development Team Leader introduced the report and update sheet and provided Members with a brief overview. Members noted that the application was for the demolition of existing crematorium buildings and removal of storage containers, temporary cabin and temporary cold store; and the construction of a new crematorium building incorporating chapels of rest, cremation hall and space for storage containers within storage yard, relocation of existing waste transfer facilities for hazardous and non-hazardous waste; and associated landscaping. Full details were included in the published report.

     

    Speakers:

     

    The Local Member, Tim Oliver, made the following comments:

     

    1. Noted that, as Leader of the Council, he was an ex officio of the Committee (non-voting).
    2. That he was strongly opposed to the application.
    3. That the site was within the Metropolitan Green Belt and that applications should not be approved except in very special circumstances.
    4. That the reasons provided in the report within paragraph 90 were inadequate
    5. That paragraph 57 onwards of the report set out clearly all the reasons why the application breaches Policy 9 of the Surrey Waste Local Plan, the Elmbridge Core Strategy 2011 and the Elmbridge Local Development Management Plan Policy DM17.
    6. Noted that the Elmbridge Local Plan was under inspection and included strong protection for the green belt.
    7. The proposed buildings were larger in scale, mass and volume than the existing development.
    8. That Planning Officers accepted that the proposal would give rise to a loss of openness to the Green Belt, on both space and visual grounds, and would therefore cause harm to the green belt.
    9. That the proposed development was a significant industrial operation and would cause considerable harm by its impact on the openness of the Green Belt and would therefore be inappropriate development and does not meet the test of very special circumstances.

     

    A Member of the Committee asked the Local Member for his view on other major developments in the green belt on previously developed land. The Local Member stated that he strongly opposed any development on the green belt.

     

    A Member of the Committee asked the Local Member to elaborate on his definition of the ‘need for business’ and why he felt that it had not been met. The Local Member stated that there was an existing operation which had received permission however this was different from an expansion for commercial reasons and that he did not see it as a justification for intensifying the site to generate a greater profit.  

     

    Mark Ashman spoke in objection to the application and made the following comments:

     

    1. Stated that, without the waste element, the application would have been determined by Elmbridge Borough Council. It was noted that Elmbridge Borough Council had rejected both the current and previous applications on the grounds of inappropriate development. In the Green Belt and found no very special circumstances.
    2. That he had expected the Planning Officer to reach the same conclusion as Elmbridge Borough Council.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/24

8/24

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

    • Share this item

    The next meeting of the Planning & Regulatory Committee will be on 27 March 2024.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The date of the next meeting was noted.