Agenda item

2021/0621 Twisted Stone Golf Club, Pyrford Road, Woking


[NOTE: In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Mr Andrew Grimshaw attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and the applicant chose not to address the Committee.]


The Committee considered a Section 73 for variation of condition 15 of planning permission ref: 95/1044 (allowed at appeal), dated 23.06.1997 (Construction of 18 hole pay and play golf course, alterations and extension to the existing farmhouse to form clubhouse and provision of associated car parking accessed from Pyrford Road and the creation of an additional footpath at Lees Farm, Pyrford Road, West Byfleet) to amend the wording which restricts existing use of the clubhouse building to purposes ancillary to and only used in association with golf course use (retaining existing restriction on clubhouse building opening hours) (amended description).


Councillor G Elson, Ward Councillor, explained that he had called this application before the Committee to ensure that the number of objections received were heard by the Planning Members. Councillor G Elson raised a number of concerns, particularly regarding the noise that could be generated after 8.00pm. He asked Members of the Committee to give due consideration to the concerns that had been raised and whether this variation was appropriate.


Following a query from the Chairman regarding parking standards, the Planning Officer explained that the Pyrford Neighbourhood Plan did not set different parking standards and that the parking assessments had been undertaken using the Parking Standards SPD. The Planning Officer reminded the Committee that the variation of the condition was the only matter for them to consider.


Councillor S Dorsett, Ward Councillor, commented that he was also opposed to the application due to the potential noise issues and noted that there were no mitigation measures proposed regarding the noise.


Following a question regarding the enforcement notice the Planning Officer explained that an appeal by the applicant was still pending on this, so it was not possible to progress the enforcement until the appeal had concluded. It was noted that this issue did not prejudice consideration of the application before the Committee.


Following a query the Planning Officer advised that the condition wording was historic and ‘sunrise’ was not language that would be used now when referencing opening hours.


The Chairman queried whether there were other conditions around sound already imposed and the Planning Officer confirmed that there were and that the table on page 30 showed how these would be pulled through if this application was approved.


A number of Members on the committee shared the concerns raised regarding noise and the impact this application would have on the local area. They also commented that this application was in contravention of the Pyrford Neighbourhood Plan and this needed to be carefully considered.


Councillor T Aziz, Vice-Chairman did not think there was sufficient grounds to refuse the application and following on from his comments the Development Manager explained that if this application was refused and then did go to appeal and succeed, the condition would be in the control of the Planning Inspector who could chose to vary it.


Councillor S Dorsett proposed and it was duly seconded by Councillor J Brown, that the application be refused on the grounds of noise and the harm to the local area contrary to policies DM3, DM7, CS21 and SCS1.


In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion above.  The votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows.

In favour:                           Cllrs J Brown, S Dorsett, D Hughes, N Martin, C Rana and D Roberts.

                                 TOTAL:  6

Against:                              None

                                 TOTAL:  0

Present but not voting:      Cllrs T Aziz and L Morales (Chairman).

                                 TOTAL:  2

The application was therefore refused.




That planning permission be REFUSED.

Supporting documents: