Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Tuesday, 21st March, 2023 7.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber - Civic Offices

Contact: Becky Capon on 01483 743011 or email 


No. Item



To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 28 February 2023 as published.

Additional documents:


Councillor S Dorsett commented that under item 6c 2022/0393 Cherrywood, reference was made in the minutes to a Residents Forum, which did not exist. The reference should have been to the Residents Association and the Neighbourhood Forum, both of which had objected to the application.



That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 28 February 2023 be approved and signed as a true and correct record, with the exception of the error noted above.


Apologies for Absence

Additional documents:


Apologies for absence were received from Councillor T Aziz.


Declarations of Interest

(i)    To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary and other interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.

(ii)   In accordance with the Officer Procedure Rules, any Officer who is a Council- appointed Director of a Thameswey Group company will declare an interest in any item involving that Thameswey Group company. The interest will not prevent the Officer from advising the Committee on that item.

Additional documents:


No declarations of interest were received.


Urgent Business

To consider any business that the Chairman rules may be dealt with under Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Additional documents:


There were no items of Urgent Business.


Planning and Enforcement Appeals pdf icon PDF 57 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee received a report on the planning appeals lodged and the appeal decisions.


That the report be noted.


Planning Applications pdf icon PDF 50 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee determined the following applications subject to the conditions, informatives, reasons for refusal or authorisation of enforcement action which appear in the published report to the Committee or as detailed in these minutes.



2022/0694 Land On the West Side Of Egley Road, Egley Road pdf icon PDF 192 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered an application for planning permission for the redevelopment of Land West of Egley Road, Woking to include 86 dwellings (43 market dwellings and 43 affordable dwellings) (C3 Use Class), the erection of a 62- bed care home building (Use Class C2), new vehicular access point off Egley Road with improved pedestrian and cycle links, open and recreational space as well as hard and soft landscaping throughout the site, SUDs, car parking, biodiversity features and other associated infrastructure (Amended Description) (Amended Plans).


In his role as County Councillor for this division, Councillor W Forster spoke in objection to the application and raised concern about the appropriateness of the development and whether it was in keeping with the bordering dwelling and surrounding area. He commented that it was proposed that some of the taller dwellings would be built on the highest area of the site, which would dominate the landscape. Councillor W Forster was worried that this development would remove the green gap between Mayford and Woking and would be a loss of biodiversity. In regards to the affordable housing, the Councillor commented that this looked to be a positive, however when you looked into the numbers, only eleven units of traditional family housing were being provided, a large proportion would be provided in the apartment blocks.


Following a question regarding the required separation on the eastern and south eastern border of the site, the Planning Officer advised that in their opinion visual separation had been achieved and this had been addressed in some detail at the pre-application stage. It was noted that this was a allocated site under the Site Allocations DPD 2021, so it was expected that it would be developed. It was required that any development on this site maintain a sense of visual separation (not physical separation). There was a robust band of oak trees on the eastern boundary that would be retained, along with additional planting and on the south eastern edge of the site the dwellings would be set back. This would provide an approximate 45-65 metre wide green gap along the eastern, south eastern boundary and the highway. Then test of GP7 was for visual separation to be maintain and in the Planning Officers opinion this was achieved by the application. The Committee were reminded the Planning Inspector changed the site to require visual separation, rather than local separation.


Following a query, the Planning Officer confirmed that a care home was an acceptable use for this site, along with the residential dwellings. This was not contrary to the Core Strategy or Policy GP7.


Some Members largely supported the application, however they had some concerns around the amount of parking provided to the care home. The Planning Officer acknowledged that the parking provision was towards the lower end of what was expected, however this did meet policy requirements. It was noted there were visitor spaces throughout the site which did deliver extra capacity.


Following a question about adding a condition to secure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6a


2022/1168 Quevrue, Holly Bank Road, Woking pdf icon PDF 66 KB

Additional documents:


[NOTE 1: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that four additional letters of objection had been received which mainly reiterated the comments already summarised within the representations section of the report.]


[NOTE 2: In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Mr Simon Ashall attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and Mr James Gellini spoke in support.]


The Committee considered an application for the erection of an apartment building containing seven flats following demolition of existing dwelling, with associated landscaping, parking and bin and cycle stores (amended plans rec'd 14.02.2023 and 15.02.2023).


Following a question about the chimneys, the Planning Officer confirmed that these had been added as a decorative feature at the request of the Planning Officer to add interest.


Some Members of the Committee commented that there were positive aspects about the application, however they also had concerns. These concerns related to the affect this development would have on the street scene due to the scale bulk and mass. It was also thought that it was contrary to Policy BE1 of the Hook Heath Neighbourhood Plan, which should be given considerable weight.


The Planning Officer commented that matters of bulk, mass and design were subjective and that Officers had looked at these in detail. Woodbank to the west and Hollywell to the south created a specific context to the site which was considered acceptable and in keeping. A Member commented that one of the nearby apartment buildings had been allowed on appeal due to it being sheltered accommodation and queried whether this would affect the acceptability of the proposed application. The Planning Officer commented that it was not obvious that Woodbank was a C2 scheme so in terms of character and appearance it was not possible to differentiate this view.


Following concerns raised regarding the amenity space, the Planning Officer commented that in their opinion this was considered acceptable and condition 21 covered this in detail.


Some Members thought that allowing this development would set a precedent and although it was not out of character within the immediate area, it was out of character for Hook Heath. This development could see a domino affect in Hook Heath and potential start to place change.


The Planning Officer commented that the application was a matter of planning judgement. There were currently apartment buildings on two sides of the site, which meant it did not appear out of character to the immediate area. That said, it was impossible to guarantee that approval of this application would not affect the North and East of the site. Planning Officers had come to the conclusion that they would be more likely to lose on appeal if this application was refused.


Councillor S Dorsett proposed, and it was duly seconded by Councillor J Brown that the application be refused on the grounds of scale, bulk and mass which was contrary to policy CS21.


In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6b


2023/0085 Garages 1 To 12 Between 31 And Pond, Bonsey Lane, Westfield pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Additional documents:


[NOTE 1: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that two additional letters of objection had been received which mainly reiterated the comments already summarised within the report.]


[NOTE 2: The Planning Officer advised that Surrey Highway had submitted a response which sought additional information on the scheme. The Planning Officer had gone back to request clarification on why they needed this as the application was identical to the last time it was submitted and approved, and Surrey Highways had come back with no comment. The only change was that the housing type had changed from social to affordable.


The Committee considered an application for demolition of 12no existing disused garages and erection of a three storey 7no unit apartment block.



That authority be delegated to the Development Manager (or their authorised deputy) to Grant planning permission subject to:

                  i.         Planning conditions set out in the report; and

                 ii.        Undertaking of the Chief Executive of Woking Borough Council to secure:

• SAMM (TBH SPA) contribution of £5,573;

• 100% affordable rented units (i.e. 7no units); (Officer Note: As Woking Borough Council is the owner of the land the subject of this planning application, it cannot enter into a Section 106 legal agreement to secure any planning obligations which may be required to mitigate the effects of the proposed development. However, the Council’s Chief Executive is able to commit the Council to give effect to the specific measures in this case under delegated authority. Any such commitment by the Council’s Chief Executive would provide certainty that such 21 MARCH 2023 PLANNING COMMITTEE measures will be given effect and implemented for the proposed development.)





2023/0060 3 Dinsdale Close, Woking pdf icon PDF 57 KB

Additional documents:


This application had been withdrawn from the agenda.



2022/1126 212 High Road, Byfleet, West Byfleet pdf icon PDF 45 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered an application for the retention of boundary fence. (Retrospective).


The Committee were minded to refuse the application and encouraged the applicant to re-submit an application that was more appropriate. Members did not want to set a precedent for a fence of this height in this area.




That planning permission be REFUSED and authorise formal enforcement proceedings.




2022/0882 Turners, The Ridge, Woking pdf icon PDF 75 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered an application for the  erection of fencing along front and side boundary. (Retrospective)




That planning permission be REFUSED and formal enforcement proceedings authorised.