Football club clubhouse at Cobham Football Club, Cobham SurreyKT11 1AF
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Elmbridge Planning Committee on 10 Mar 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed a two-storey clubhouse, stand extensions, cycle storage, a gate and fencing, toilet relocation and demolition of existing buildings.
“Planning permission is sought for the construction of a detached two-storey building for use as a clubhouse (F2) (611sqm), extensions to existing spectator stands, addition of a cycle store, a new sliding gate and fencing and relocation of existing toilet block followed by demolition of the existing building, ancillary buildings and storage containers within one year of the commencement of works.”
Officer report
The site and earlier permissions
The site is a football ground with stands, a clubhouse, floodlighting, storage, parking and related structures, with several earlier football-ground permissions.
“The application site is the Cobham Football Club football ground on the northern side of the Leg O’ Mutton Field, located on the north side of Downside Bridge Road in Cobham. The application site consists of a football pitch with spectator stands, a single-storey clubhouse, floodlighting, storage units, parking area and several structures associated with the football ground.”
“Reference Description Decision 2022/3295 Confirmation of Compliance with Condition: 4 (Landscaping - tree/hedge planting and aftercare) of planning permission 2022/1545. Confirm Compliance 2022/1545 Replacement 3G football pitch with spectator seating, floodlighting, equipment storage container, installation of ball stop fencing, acoustic pitch barrier, boundary fencing and hard and soft landscaping.”
Officer report
Why officers supported it
Officers considered the sporting and community benefits, strategic need and club sustainability benefits sufficient to outweigh Green Belt harm and recommended permission.
“The proposed replacement clubhouse, extensions to the existing spectator stands and entrance gates and boundary fencing have been considered under exception (b) of paragraph 154 as it is associated with providing outdoor sports facilities. However, these aspects of the development are considered to fail to preserve the openness of the Green Belt. As such, the proposed development is considered to constitute inappropriate development within the Green Belt.”
“VSCs have been identified related to the public and community benefits arising from provision of enhanced sporting facilities and the strategic need for the sporting infrastructure delivered by the proposal. Additionally, the proposal would help provide additional revenue streams to ensure the economic sustainability of the football club.”
Officer report
The Green Belt issue
The clubhouse, stand extensions, fencing, gates, cycle stores and bin stores were considered inappropriate Green Belt development because they would not preserve openness.
“Whilst the proposed relocation of the toilet block and addition of cycle storage is considered to be development that would not impact the openness of the Green Belt, the proposed replacement clubhouse, extensions to the two spectator stands, cycle stores, bin stores and the boundary fencing and new entrance gates are considered to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt as they would fail to preserve the openness of it.”
“Therefore, it is considered that, despite being considered as development associated with outdoor sporting facilities that align with exception (b) of paragraph 154, the proposed replacement clubhouse, extensions to the two spectator stands and the boundary fencing, cycle stores, bin stores and new entrance gates would not preserve the openness of the Green Belt and would, thus, be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.”
Officer report
What consultees said
Highways, flood, leisure, sport, ecology, trees, environmental health and greenspace consultees raised no objections, subject to conditions in several cases.
“Surrey County Council (SCC) Highways Authority – no objections raised subject to three conditions to secure a Construction Transport Management Plan, Electric Vehicle charging points and parking for cycles and e-bikes.”
“Environmental Health (Noise & Pollution) – no objections raised subject to conditions to secure a noise impact assessment, a noise management plan and details of an external lighting scheme.”
Officer report
What residents said
Twenty-six letters from 18 addresses raised concerns including noise, traffic, parking, appearance, height, overlooking, trees and allotments, while 64 letters supported the scheme.
“There have been 26 letters of objection/observation received from 18 separate addresses and 64 letters of support, as summarised below:”
“Objection/observation • It will increase noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties. • The development will increase traffic in the area, causing traffic congestion and impacting parking amenity for local residents. • It will attract aggressive and rude people. • The proposed two-storey structure is out of keeping with the area. • The proposed clubhouse is unattractive. • The balcony at first floor will overlook neighbours.”
Officer report
Changes discussed
The Senior Planning Officer advised of an amended landscaping condition and a proposed additional condition requiring arboricultural information.
“In commencing his introduction, the Senior Planning Officer advised the Committee of a change to proposed Condition No. 6 by the inclusion of reference to ‘d) boundary treatment’ in the listing, and of a proposed additional Condition relating to arboricultural information.”
Minutes
The committee decision
The committee permitted the application with the agenda conditions and informatives, including amended landscaping details and an additional arboricultural condition.
“Amended Condition 6. Landscaping scheme Prior to first occupation [being brought into use] written details and plans of the following landscaping works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved.”
“Additional Condition 23. Additional Arboricultural Information No development including groundworks and demolition shall take place until all supporting arboricultural information has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include details of the:”
Minutes
Sources
- Elmbridge Planning Committee minutes, 10 March 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Elmbridge's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Elmbridge Planning Committee
- Council
- Elmbridge
- Date
- Tuesday 10 March 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Elmbridge committee decisions →
This committee's year
16 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 1 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.