Cobham Green Belt Threat

Those of you who attended our Open Meeting in December will have heard Councillor James Browne explain that the Council was having to produce a new Local Plan, and a major part of the Plan was to provide 9,480 new homes by 2035 - an increase of 5,755 more than previously planned.

I am sure the first thought that came to most people's mind was 'What about the infrastructure, roads, local school places, local health provision etc?". What we are faced with is the possible loss of three areas of Green Belt land within the borough of Elmbridge:-

1. North of Blundell Lane in the Knowle Hill Park, Fairmile Park, and the Polyapes (Scout Camp) area, and the area of land up to the "Brickpit" pond which includes a number of designated "Ancient Woodland Areas".
2. Chippings Farm and the Fairmile between the Portsmouth Road and the A3.

These two are local and the third area is in Long Ditton near the A3.

We are now in a Consultation Period lasting up until the 10th February 2017.

You can find out more about what is proposed and how it might affect you by attending one of the drop in sessions provided by the council as detailed below, and by reading the documentation on the Elmbridge Borough Council website via the following link:

  www.consult.elmbridge.gov.uk/consult.ti/lpsoc/consultationHome

Council Drop in Sessions

It is vital that you let the Council know your thoughts and concerns by responding to the Consultation, either by using the online consultation portal questionnaire or printing out the Response Form and e-mailing it to the Council at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or by post to Planning Policy, Planning Services, Elmbridge Borough Council, Civic Centre, High Street, Esher, KT10 9SD.

Our team is analysing the information provided, and we will be putting more information on this website (www.cobhamheritage.org.uk) and the Cobham Greenbelt website (www.cobhamgreenbelt.org.uk), which we feel will be helpful during this consultation period.

Other local organisations including Cobham & Downside Residents' Association, Stoke D'Abernon Residents' Association and Oxshott Residents' Association (Fedora) are also very concerned and are objecting to these proposals.

Finally, the Government, who are pushing for more homes to be built, has emphasised that Greenbelt designation should only be amended "In exceptional circumstances" and "with the support of local people".

We do hope you will take part in the Consultation and encourage your neighbours and friends to voice their opinion. It is our communities which could be affected.

Holly Parade Development in Cobham to be considered at Full Planning Meeting. Why it should be Refused.

NOTE: Planning Meeting Time brought forward, see new times in red below

Those of you who were able to join a capacity gathering at our Open Meeting in December will have heard the disappointment expressed in no uncertain manner at the news that the South Area Planning Sub-Committee had recommended approval of 1-7 Holly Parade (Planning Ref 2016/2185). Our view remains that the Officers report was flawed and some of the content legally unsound, with little or no reference made to the letters of opposition. Hopefully all is not lost and the Application will now go to a meeting of the Full Planning Committee on the 17th January 2017.

I have written to the Chairman and members of the Full Planning Committee, with relevant enclosures pointing out our fundamental concern at the decision. We continue to challenge the mass, height and design of the building, its view from the conservation area coming from Riverhill and air quality in our High Street.

We also pointed out that the Council Conservation Officer was not consulted, even though the proposed development would be visible from the Conservation Area. I can report that comments have now been lodged by the Conservation Officer, who has reported:

"I consider there would be the possibility of this part of the building being visible from within the Conservation Area, particularly in the part of the High Street nearer to River Hill which is in the vicinity of a number of listed buildings. Given its height and bulk and large flat roof area, I consider, therefore, that there could be some detrimental impact on the setting of the Conservation Area."

We have gathered together various documents below including our correspondence to members of the Planning Committee, together with the comments provided by the Conservation Officer.

This Application will be considered at the Full Planning Committee meeting to be held at the Civic Centre,High St, Esher KT10 9SD on Tuesday 17th January starting at 7.00pm 7.45pm, and we urge you to come along to this meeting to support our opposition to this application in its present form. It is most important that we have a good turn out. We are hoping to meet outside the main entrance to the Civic Centre at 6.30pm 7.15pm and we will have a suitable banner to make our point about this flawed application. Please feel free to bring your own placards!

It was very disappointing that at the Sub-Committee Hearing less than 20 objectors came along in person, despite the fact that there were some 450 written objections. So if you want to support us come out and show that support on Tuesday 17th January 2017 – wrap up warmly and we shall see you at 6.30pm 7.15pm outside the main entrance of the Elmbridge Borough Council, Civic Centre, High St, Esher KT10 9SD.

Read more: Holly Parade Development in Cobham to be considered at Full Planning Meeting. Why it should be...

Opposition to the 1-7 Holly Parade Planning Application 2016/2185

At the Elmbridge Borough Council South Area Planning meeting on the 12th December 2016, the 1-7 Holly Parade planning application (Ref 2016/2185) was approved by 6 votes to 2 with one abstention for forwarding to the Full Planning Committee next month.

Gerry Acher spoke on behalf of Cobham Conservation & Heritage Trust to oppose the application. For those who were unable to attend, the details of what was said is shown below:-

Councillors and Officers, good evening and thank you for affording me the opportunity to speak. As Chairman of Cobham Heritage I speak for our 1,100 members who represent approaching 15% of the households in in KT11.

First, I apologise for bombarding you with a long report just before the weekend. We had less than a week to consider the planning officer’s report and felt the conclusions so deeply flawed - and I use these words advisedly and not emotionally - it was just not possible to summarise it.

Of course, we want to see this site developed – the current buildings are an eyesore and the empty shops are damaging our high street but this application is wrong for Cobham. Sadly,in three minutes I can only deal with two of the many issues.

But this application went off the rails at the start. Pre-planning advice covered impact on the character of the area and encouraged the developer to submit the application. The die was cast and in our view the officer’s report tries to justify that advice rather than provide an objective critique.

Read more: Opposition to the 1-7 Holly Parade Planning Application 2016/2185

Notes following South Area Planning meeting 12th December 2016

There are four issues which trouble me following the above meeting where the Holly Parade planning application (Ref 2016/2185) was approved by 6 votes to 2 with one abstention for forwarding to Full Planning Committee next month:

• It appears that the saved policies such as CS1, CS10, CS17 and DM2 relating to such areas as design, enhancing public realm, integrating sensitively with the local distinctive landscape and enhancing local character carry no weight with Bristol Inspectors and are therefore hardly worth the paper they are written on. If this is a correct assessment, some important rethinking is necessary.
• That the in excess of 450 objections most of which appeared to have been individually and carefully crafted representing between 6%and 7% of dwellings in KT11 could be tossed aside at the stroke of a pen. This is particularly in the context that questions were raised at the meeting with the developers as to how effective the advertising of their consultations in reaching out to the community had been.
• That the Localism Act of 2011 of allowing the wishes of local people to be given more weight in the decision making process seems not to have percolated down to the planning process.
• That the whole subject of air pollution hangs over this application like a toxic cloud. Whilst I believe all parties now accept that this redevelopment is in one of the worst parts of Cobham for persistent poor air quality and that the elderly are particularly vulnerable to poor air quality, the way forward remains opaque. If I heard her correctly, Elmbridge’s legal adviser proffered that air quality was an issue for Public Health and not for Planning; thus, no condition requiring the non-opening of fenestration, access to balconies or communal terraces overlooking the High Street could be made.

Whatever the legal advice, it seems to me morally reprehensible for Elmbridge BC (for which I have the highest regard and have said so publicly) to knowingly put vulnerable members of the community at risk by allowing such a development without such conditions to go ahead.

Equally McCarthy and Stone who are rightly renowned as a class act in their field of accommodation for the elderly surely, on reflection, would not want to put vulnerable people at risk. Indeed, they would be risking their own high reputation; this takes years to gain but can be lost in an instant.

Thus, I hope that between now and the full planning meeting in January 2017, this application will be reconsidered by all parties and either the vulnerable residents are to be protected from harmful effects of poor air quality or this application is withdrawn.

G Acher 13th December 2016