Letter: Urnfield Planning Decision Shows Planning Committee Is Not Fit For Purpose

Published on: 6 Dec, 2021
Updated on: 7 Dec, 2021

From: Howard Smith

Vice-chair of Guildford Labour Party

In response to: Urnfield Sports Pitch Application Unanimously Rejected By Councillors Against Planning Officers Advice

There were other decisions at the planning meeting last week that call into question what is going on at the committee. Only two weeks ago members were advised that turning over perfectly adequate applications was costing the council increasing amounts of money in defending lost appeals. Members have clearly not listened to the message or don’t care.

It is extraordinary that this application to upgrade school sports facilities (to be shared between two schools) was turned down because it backs on to the Downs. If we can’t even allow good facilities for children’s sports, what is the point?

But then later some sensible preparatory work for the development at Wisley was turned down. I can only guess that the committee, or some members of it, don’t like the Wisley development and so are refusing this bit of access development in place of being able to refuse the Wisley development itself.

This will almost certainly be reversed on appeal at great cost and delay which will then no doubt cause further traffic problems in the area.

Though the committee may be balanced politically, no one seems to have noticed the inherent bias in favour of the more rural areas of the town. At the meeting last week we had no voting members from Holy Trinity, Christchurch or even Burpham or Merrow and only one from Friary & St Nicolas. Yet two from Shalford, one each from Clandon, Worpledson, Effingham, Normandy and Lovelace. How is this representative of Guildford as a town?

It would be of great service to Guildford if the current committee was dissolved, new members recruited, and full training given. Perhaps then we might have a Planning Committee fit for purpose.

Share This Post