At a packed meeting of the Planning Committee at the offices of Tandridge District Council in Oxted on Thursday 8th March, planning permission was refused for the application by Independence Homes to redevelop the site occupied by the former Marie Curie Hospice building in Harestone Valley Road. After a lengthy debate attended by many local Caterham residents, the application was only refused on the grounds that the proposal is contrary to the clear principles set out in the Marie Curie Design Concept Statement with regard to maintaining the character and sylvan nature of the site. Following the meeting, Caterham Valley Parish Council issued the following statement:

"The members of Caterham Valley Parish Council that attended the Planning Committee meeting were very disappointed in the way the application to develop the Marie Curie site was handled.

It seemed that the Planning Officer and the Committee were more concerned about the possibility of incurring some expense if they were to lose an appeal than anything else. "Not much consideration was given to the objections raised, including those by near neighbours over their loss of outlook and the increased volume of traffic which would result in this over development of out of character buildings.

"Eothen Health Centre unusually made an objection because of their inability to cope with the increased number of patients that they would have to cater for. This objection was glossed over quickly.

"No consideration was given to the Harestone Valley Design Guidance which was adopted in March 2011 after a lot of work by local Councillors.

"The application was refused on the grounds of some trees with preservation orders having to be felled. Previous experience shows that this is not an insurmountable problem for developers. "It was only the Caterham Valley District Councillors that consistently voted against the application. They were outnumbered by the rest of the Committee that are from other parts of the Tandridge area who did not share our concerns over this type of development in Caterham."

Tandridge District Councillor for Caterham Valley, Beverley Connolly, added: "I know that the residents will be totally appalled by the dreadful decision reached by the Planning Committee. Although the application was refused due to loss of tree cover, the motions opposing concerned with the bulk and overdevelopment of the site were lost. This decision will drive a coach and horses through the recently adopted Harestone Valley plan and will give any developer carte blanche to build what they like in that beautiful part of the Harestone Valley. I would like to know whether those Councillors who did not support these motions, despite being told by the Senior Planning Officer that he could defend them at appeal, would be happy with a development of this massing and density in their own wards. Again, another example of "anything as long as it's in Caterham". I strongly believe that membership of the Planning Committee at TDC should be reviewed in the light of yet another bad planning decision for our area."