ANGRY Byfleet residents were riled even further by the chief executive’s decision not to begin an inquiry into council conduct over the Murrays Lane row.

Byfleeters were out in force at the civic offices last Thursday, packing the public gallery as Ray Morgan and the council fended questions from three speakers over their part in an application to build a gypsy site on green belt land in the village.

The audience with council top brass comes after immense pressure from Byfleet, West Byfleet and Pyrford Residents’ Association and upset residents who oppose the plans.

More than 730 residents signed a letter demanding an inquiry into the way Woking’s planning office have handled the proposals. But planning portfolio holder Councillor Ashley Bowes revealed that no such inquest will be carried out.

Cllr Bowes explained: “The chief executive has considered the request for an independent inquiry and concluded that it is unwarranted.

“He has written to all those who sent representation to him explaining the position and the background which led him to his decision. I agree with his view.”

But this failed to appease the masses who jeered the council from the gallery.

Speaking over the commotion, Mr Morgan said that letters had gone out that day (July 18).

The letter read: “Having reviewed the background and detail in this matter I have concluded that it would be inappropriate for me to commission an independent inquiry. I appreciate that you may be disappointed by my decision in respect of your request.

"I would hope that this letter provides you with sufficient explanation as well as making a response to the criticisms and concerns that you have raised.”

Also in the letter, which is available to view on the council website, Mr Morgan addressed residents’ anger over the planning officers’ inability to carry objections over to new proposals, an obstacle residents ran into when initial proposals first came to light.

Mr Morgan explained: “The planning authority has a legal duty to determine all planning applications it receives.

“Each application must be considered on its own merits and follow a process which involves notifying local residents and consulting with other stakeholders, such as the Highways Agency.

“The first application (PLAN/2013/0016), was withdrawn by the applicant. This is a legitimate request which the planning authority had to respect.

“The letters received are held against that application. Accordingly that plan is no longer before the planning authority for consideration.

“The applicant then submitted another application for a similar development (PLAN/2013/0426). The authority notified local residents and all those who had previously made representations.

“The planning authority is not entitled to carry forward letters of objection from one application to the next; even if it were able to do so it would be making the assumption that each individual would object again without having had opportunity to review the application submission.

“I am sorry if you consider this to have been a waste of time but the planning authority must comply with its legislative obligations.”

He also defended the absence of the officer handling the application in the build-up to the close of the objections deadline.

“It is regrettable that shortly after the second application was made valid letters were sent out when the case officer went on holiday,” the letter continues.

“As part of your petition you have requested that the case officer be suspended pending a formal inquiry.

“It is a serious matter to make an allegation against an individual, which could warrant suspension [of the officer].

“I have seen no such evidence and, in my view, it was wholly inappropriate and unjustified for you to criticise the officer concerned in this matter.”

Despite the severity of the issue, Mr Morgan went on to say that the application will not be reviewed by the full council. But secretary of Byfleet Residents’ Action Group John Bond says the council are contradicting their constitution.

On the council website under section 8 of the ‘Questions on Petitions’ page, it states that an application will be referred to the full council if at least 400 residents raise an objection.

Mr Morgan told the News & Mail: “In accordance with the council constitution, petitions that relate to planning matters are considered by the planning committee, and will therefore be considered by the committee. The matter will not be separately considered by the council.”

The planning committee are set to consider the application on Tuesday following the release of an officer’s report earlier this week.