Minutes of the Planning Committee Meeting of the Parish Council 12th September 2024

Select the 2024 Agenda or Minutes you wish to view:
2024 Meetings	MAY	JUN	JUL	AUG	SEP	OCT	NOV	DEC	KEY: ≡ Agenda 📖 Minutes
Main	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖
Planning	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖	≡ 📖
EHT		≡ 📖		≡ 📖		≡ 📖		≡ 📖	⇛ 2025

Dawn Lacey — Parish Clerk & RFO

claygate PARISH COUNCIL

caring for Claygate Village

Claygate Parish Council

Claygate Village Hall

Church Road

Claygate

Surrey KT10 0JP

☎ 07741 848 719

email: clerk@claygateparishcouncil.gov.uk

website: www.claygateparishcouncil.gov.uk

Minutes of the Planning Committee Meeting of Claygate Parish Council held on Thursday 12th September 2024 at 7.30pm at Treetops Pavilion, Recreation Ground, Church Road, Claygate

Present:	Chair: Cllr Sheppard
Council Members:	Cllr Holt, Cllr Moon, Cllr Collon, Cllr Herbert and Cllr Bingham
In attendance:	Dawn Lacey (Parish Clerk & RFO) Non-voting Advisors: John Bamford and John Burns Two members of the public

1.	Apologies for absence.
	Apologies were received from Cllr Bray, Cllr Moon and Non-Voting Advisor John Ovenden.

2.	Declarations of interest in the agenda.
	Cllr Holt declared an interest in item 7: application 2024/2185

3.	Confirm the minutes of the 15th August 2024 Planning Committee meeting.
	The following amendment was made to Item 8 as follows: During discussion of 2024/1872 11 Elm Gardens, Cllr Bray proposed that the Clerk should write to Cllr Coomes requesting that the application be taken to the next East Area Planning Committee Meeting. This proposal was accepted by the meeting. This change was Proposed by Cllr Sheppard and seconded by Cllr Holt. Carried unanimously.

4.	Review actioning of items from previous minutes and agree any further action required. (Appendix 1)
	Item 11 – Compliance issues with 11 Elm Gardens is still ongoing Item12 – Proposed responses to the NPPF also still ongoing

5.

Review planning correspondence, notification of applications and outstanding results and agree any action required.

There has been a recent announcement of a consultation regarding comments on planning applications from the general public. Elmbridge Borough Council is proposing to remove the names and addresses of people making comments regarding planning applications. The Planning Committee feels that anonymity could lead to more issues and problems and will object to this proposal. Clerk to send our comments to EBC and will discuss this with Cllr Collon, who had drafted a response. Proposed by Cllr Collon and seconded by Cllr Sheppard. Carried unanimously. ACTION: Clerk & Cllr Collon

6.	Review Report on Applications Decided, and Appeals Lodged and Decided since last meeting and agree any action required. (Appendix 2)
	EBC had one different comment on an application to CPC. Other than that, there was nothing to report.

7.	Discuss planning applications from Elmbridge Borough Council (EBC) Weekly Planning Lists (https://www.elmbridge.gov.uk/planning) for the following weeks and agree responses required: w/e 16th August, 23rd August, 30th August, 6th and 13th September (Appendix 3)
	All the attached applications were discussed and all decisions attached in Appendix 2.

8.	Receive a report on EBC’s East Area Sub Committee Meeting and agree any action required.
	Nothing to report. Next meeting due to be held on 7th October. It was noted that Cllr Coomes had not yet felt able to refer 11 Elm Gardens to the Committee, as EBC are still in discussion with the applicants.

9.	Receive a report on EBC’s Planning Committee Meeting and agree any action required.
	Nothing to report.

10.	To review the draft CPC responses to the Governments Consultation on Proposed reforms to the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) and other changes to the planning system and agree any action required.
	Cllr Sheppard went through the draft responses from the Councillors on the NPPF and made proposals on which areas we would comment on and which ones we wouldn’t, followed by proposing draft responses which had been previously circulated. All responses attached in Appendix 3.

11.	Discuss any Communication of key decisions to Residents and agree any action required.
	None.

11a.

Questions from members of the Public The following Questions were asked: 1. Why is every member of the Planning committee expected to review every planning application submitted by householders? As we know, only Elmbridge has the power to refuse planning permission, either via a Planning Officer or a committee of ward councillors. Like any resident, the Parish Council can object to a planning application, but cannot refuse permission. In Cllr Collon's document produced ahead of last month's Planning Committee meeting, he wrote that: …householder applications will only be decided by East Area Sub-Committee if referred by a ward councillor or if they are on behalf of members, the council or officers of the council; otherwise, even if there are objections from 15+ households, or from CPC, the application will still be decided by a planning officer. One implication of the document is a belief that planning officers tend to be less susceptible than ward councillors to pressure from CPC. Why does the Parish Council bother to review householder planning applications if its verdict is highly likely to be overridden by the assigned Planning Officer? What special knowledge or expertise does the Parish Council have, which it believes neither the Planning Officer nor affected residents possess, which justifies the duplication of effort involved in having every councillor on the Planning Committee review every planning application? Would it not be more economical and efficient to copy what some Residents Associations in the area do—that is, to have one person review all the applications for the period and flag up to the other members of the Planning Committee only those applications which he/she deems sufficiently controversial to be worthy of their attention?

Councillor Sheppard replied to this question as follows: 1. We have a grass roots view of local sites, even though we are not planning professionals. This means we can make a contribution and potentially spot issues which might be missed by a busy officer. 2. A group view of a planning application is desirable, as some may spot issues others have missed. 3. We would like the situation where CPC objections are automatically referred to East Area Planning Sub-Committee restored and have made EBC aware of our views. Councillor Holt also commented as follows: 4. Individuals should not be taking a view. The full council should be voting on key decisions and then a majority view should be held.

12.	Matters for information purposes only.
	The Remit has not been looked at/updated since 2022. The Clerk is to put this on the Agenda for the next meeting. ACTION: Clerk

13.	Date of the next meeting 7.30pm Thursday 10th October 2024, Treetops Pavilion, Recreation Ground, Church Road, Claygate KT10 0JP