Real Consultation or a Public Relations Exercise?

This morning, I in common with other residents of Mole Valley received a letter headed "Your chance to help decided where new homes should be built."

This is all very well, and maybe the Council Officers will pay regard to public consultation.  But the final word rests with our elected councillors.  Not so long ago, without any similar prompting from the Council, more than three hundred people wrote to the Council with their views concerning an exclusive golf course and luxury hotel on the Cherkley estate.  Two thirds of those letters opposed the development.   The Council Officers no doubt took that into consideration when producing their report, praised by Justice Haddon-Cave, to reject Longshot's proposals.

Did our elected representative take note of public opinion?   No; the majority ignored public representation and thought they knew better than their officers.   What guarantee is there that elected councillors will not disregard public opinion again?

One councillor recently said he would be listening to the public.  But the evidence so far is not encouraging.  Despite widespread opposition to the Council going to the Court of Appeal over the recent Cherkley decision, the councillors voted to do so.   When the LRA held a packed meeting on 2nd December at which we had presentations by Mr Rowland McKinney concerning the Green Belt and by the Save South Leatherhead and the Poors' Allotment groups, our District Councillors were noticeable by their absence!  It is true, there were apologies received from two of them, but not the proverbial dicky bird from the others!

Besides, we poor members of the public do not have proper information. We read at the beginning of the second paragraph in the Council's letter: "The main objective is to prevent inappropriate development in the Green Belt ... ."

But, as I have pointed out before, the Secretary of State rejected the application for five traveller families having their temporary permission to occupy 4.7 hectares of Green Belt being made permanent because it would cause "substantial harm to the green belt."   If this is so, then I completely fail to see how Mr Pickles could allow any residential development of the Green Belt.

• We need to know by what criteria Mr Pickles deemed occupying 4.7 hectares of Green Belt would cause substantial damage.  
• We need to know, therefore, by what criteria any of the Green Belt can be deemed appropriate for residential development.

As we've have seen both with the Cherkley Court application and with the Randalls Road travellers' application, the elected councillors can override Officer's recommendations; and with regard to the latter application, we , we saw that the Secretary of State can call an application in at the request of our local MP.   So I ask two further questions:

• Why should those same councillors not similarly override whatever recommendations are produced as a result of this current consultation?
• How can the Council retain control of where development takes place if, at the request of our MP, the Secretary of State can call an application in?

MVDC: Recycling Plastics in Mole Valley

Message from Josh Lambe, Recycling Officer, MVDC.

Hopefully the following information regarding plastics will be valuable to the group:

Firstly, it’s important to understand that ‘the message’ and how it’s presented to 100,000 residents is of vital importance. Mole Valley DC promotes a deliberately straightforward and hassle free message when communicating what items we can accept for recycling.

In practice, this means we keep the message as broad as possible, and purposely shy away from giving residents huge great lists of items which we can accept. It also means we deliberately do not publish the Recycling Identification Codes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recycling_codes ). Research shows that you’ll gain the highest yield of plastics for recycling when you keep the message simple, as it is understood the ‘average recycler’ will be put off by always having to check the code on every article they’re disposing of, or
having to check a long list of products/materials.
So, in Mole Valley, we try to give the consistent message that as far as plastics go we will accept:

ANY TYPE OF PLASTIC BOTTLE (LIDS REMOVED AND PLACED INTO THE BIN SEPARATELY) PLASTIC FOOD TUBS, POTS AND TRAYS (RINSED)

And that’s it.

So, when considering whether a plastic item is fit to be put in the recycling, firstly, if it is a plastic bottle of any kind, it is accepted for recycling. Secondly, if it is a plastic tub, pot or tray that held any kind of food substance, it is accepted for recycling.

*********************
For those diligent recyclers who wish to know what codes can be accepted, the codes we can accept are:

• 01
• 02 (but not plastic carrier bags)
• 03 (but only in bottle form)

However, some plastic items may have one of the above codes, but will be of the hard plastic variety. We cannot accept what are known as ‘rigid plastics’. Therefore a good rule of thumb is that if you cannot bend the plastic by hand, it is not suitable for recycling via the green bin (plastic kitchen utensils and children’s toys are good examples of this). Conversely, some plastic items may have one of the above codes, but be ‘flimsy’. The second rule of thumb then is that if you can crush the plastic in your hand and it stays in that shape,it is of too low-grade to be recycled (plastic bags or cling film are good examples of this). Lastly, if you think the plastic item could fall in between rigid and flimsy but you’re still not sure, the test is that if it is pretty hard plastic that still bends, but you can snap it in your hand, then it’s not accepted for recycling (flower pots are a good example of this) I hope all that will be of use. I’m always happy to answer any further questions you may have, so please do not hesitate to get in touch. I’m sorry I could not make the meeting.

Kind regards,
Josh Lambe
Mole Valley District Council
01306 879118

=============================================
Other information from correspondence:

Thanks for the information. I only have one question, which is, what happens if we put an item in the recycling bin, which should not be put in there? Does this invalidate the whole contents of the bin, or is it just a nuisance because it has to be fished out?

Hi ,

When our crews notice something in a recycling bin that is not accepted for recycling, they will reject the bin and leave a ‘contaminated bin’ sticker on it, to inform the resident. The onus is then on the resident to fish the errant item out and present their recycling again next time round. Sometimes things are only discovered once the load is delivered to the recycling facility. This will then have to be handpicked out by one of the ‘pickers’ at the site.

We’ve had bad instances in the past where people have put things in their recycle bin so bad that it has meant the whole vehicle load has been rejected at the recycling facility. For example, someone once tried to dispose of a whole massive tin of cooking oil via a communal recycling bin. This burst inside the compacter in the vehicle and… well, you can imagine the mess. A similar thing happened when a resident tried to dispose of a bottle of engine oil. Not good!

Kind regards,
Josh Lambe
Mole Valley District Council
01306 879118

MVDC: Want to make a difference? The poster ...

Click to image enlarge.....

MVDC: Want to make a difference?

At Mole Valley District Council we are looking ahead at the forthcoming elections in the following areas on May 3rd:

Ashtead Common

Ashtead Park

Ashtead Village

Bookham North

Bookham South

Dorking North

Dorking South

Fetcham East

Fetcham West

Holmwoods

Leatherhead North

leatherhead South

Westcott

We are keen to encourage our residents to consider becoming a councillor. Consequently we will be holding an information session on 29 February at 7pm here at the Pippbrook offices. The attached poster has been designed to promote this session and I would be most grateful if you would be willing to display it somewhere prominently.

I would be very happy to supply you with these posters in either A3 or A4 format. Please let me know the size and quantity, and a postal address, and I will send them out to you.

Kind regards

Louise

Louise Bircher
Customer Service and Communications Manager
Mole Valley District Council
Tel: 01306 879155
www.molevalley.gov.uk

Follow us on Twitter @MoleValleyDC

Mole Valley District Council and Social Media

Yesterday I received the following from Louise Bircher of Mole Valley District Council:
----------------------------------------------------------------
I am hoping to canvass your and your residents' views on how Mole Valley District Council uses social media please. By this I mean our website (www.molevalley.gov.uk), Twitter (@molevalleydc), Facebook (facebook.com/molevalleydc), YouTube and, more recently QR codes. We are wanting to engage with as wide range an audience as possible so, in addition to the traditional methods of magazine, leaflets, posters and information available over the telephone and face to face, we are also making use of these aforementioned social media engagement tools.

Our Twitter and YouTube accounts have been live for about six months and our followers are steadily growing. I would like to know whether or not you and your residents make use of these forms of communication and whether you find them useful? Are there other forms of social media you would like to see us using? Or could we use what we use now more effectively?

I would be most grateful if you could encourage your residents to consider this and let me have their views - perhaps through your newsletter if one is imminent or via your website or whatever means you consider appropriate...
----------------------------------------------------------------

Louise would like to collate all responses by Friday 20th May. If you have any observations please add them as comments.

Thank you.

Mole Valley District Council - Shaping Your Community

On 13th December 2010 the Government announced its Localism Bill. This was the first stage in an important process which over the next few years will see the structure of the planning system being 'radically' reformed.

How the Localism Bill and the changes in the planning system impact on the preparation of the Mole Valley Local Development Framework (LDF) is an extremely important issue for the Council and its communities. The Council has therefore prepared a Discussion Paper outlining a number of key issues that need to be considered.

The Council is seeking views on this Paper from Friday 4th March until Friday 8th April 2011.  The Discussion Paper and Comments Form can be downloaded from www.molevalley.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=11716

Also there will be a longer article on Localism by our Chairman in the LRA Spring Newsletter. Please read it.

Today a delivery lorry -tomorrow an ambulance?

Here are two photographs I took earlier this afternoon as the latest 'victim' to be denied access to Oaks Close gets stuck.

      

A bit stuck there on the left! Any better on the right? Well, no! It's stuck there as well. A bit frustrating though, after loading up and bringing the stuff from Sutton.

Wasting people's time loading and trying to deliver undeliverable loads and keeping people waiting at the other end as they wait for supplies to continue work is one thing. But supposing the vehicle had been an ambulance; the delay while the vehicle is abandoned and paramedics have to make their way on foot could be the difference between someone's life and death!

Doesn't Surrey County Council Care? Could not the Councillors and officers have worked out that if they introduced parking restrictions in neighbouring roads but did nothing in the road nearest the Station it would only exacerbate the already existing problems in that road? Couldn't they?

The cynics say they knew exactly what they were doing. Being piqued because not everyone was happy with their proposed simplistic 'solution', they will let us stew in our own juice so that we will willingly accept whatever they want to impose on us.

My own feeling is that having given up on their proposed solution they simply could not be bothered and let the thing fall by default. In other words it was thoughtlessness and negligence.

Mole Valley District Council, to its credit, is doing what it can about bin collection. MVDC Environment Department are advising cars & vans on Tuesday afternoon that vehicles preventing bin collection on Wednesday will be ticketed by Surrey Police and possibly removed; and the Department is monitoring the situation on Wednesdays. Also if, despite these efforts, no bin lorry is able to get through on a Wednesday, they will send out a lorry on the following Saturday. This use of personnel on Tuesday afternoon & Wednesday morning must cost money and, of course, if a bin lorry has to be sent out on a Saturday even more expense will be involved - extra cost to MVDC thanks to the ineptness of SCC.

We appreciate the efforts of our MVDC Ward Councillor, Bridget Lewis-Carr, in helping to find a solution to the bin problem. How about our SCC Councillor helping resolve the access problem?

Too much piecemeal and incoherent planning

Thanks to one of the residents, the bins in our road were emptied again yesterday. A month or so back, most residents in the road, a cul-de-sac, went for three weeks without any bin collection simply because the bin lorry was unable to squeeze between the cars parked by commuters on both sides of the road! So an enterprising resident made a notice asking cars not to park on one side on Wednesday so that bin collections can be made. So far, to be fair to commuters, the notice has worked.

But why should it be left to a resident to do this? Is this an example of David Cameron's "Big Society" at work? To save the Council both money and the awkward job of having to make a decision?

When proposals for parking restrictions were proposed for certain roads over a year ago, our Chairman pointed out that this would only push the problem onto other roads and that what was needed was an overall plan for parking throughout Leatherhead. He has, of course, been proved right.

To make matters worse, Surrey County Council in it wisdom decided not to implement any restrictions in two of the designated roads. What a surprise that the situation has got worse! Meanwhile we do what we can to get our bins emptied. But on any other weekday, I see no way delivery lorries, fire engine or ambulance could get up our road. Tradesmen who have come to our house have been amazed that such a situation has been allowed to arise when a solution is so obvious.

Now we have once again talk of yet another revamp of the High Street and the bit of Church Street between the barrier and the High Street. In view of the history of the various past attempts, can we have any confidence that the current efforts will be any more successful? Or will it be another patching up job? And what about the rest of Church Street? Coming into the town past empty shopping premises is not exactly a good advertisement for the town.

What about Bridge Street and North Street? Shouldn't we be thinking about the whole of the town centre, not tinkering again with just part of it? Would it not make more sense to have an overall strategy for the whole town centre? That of course, must involve parking, which is what I started with.

In my opinion Leatherhead has suffered too much from piecemeal and incoherent planning: we need an overall and coherent strategy for parking for Leatheread as a whole together with a coherent strategy for the whole of the town centre.

Little wonder that some people look back with nostalgia to the days of the Leatherhead & Urban District Council. Give us back out town!

New Weekly Food Waste Collection Service

Mole Valley District Council are in the process of introducing a weekly collection of food waste from all households in the District. The roll-out is being phased during July and August; the final collection phase will be on 6th August by which time most households will be receiving the service.

All residents are invited to attend the roadshows in order to find out more about the service, to see the bins and pose any questions about the service to officers.

All road shows are from 5pm until 7pm.

The road show for Leatherhead is on Monday 12th July at Leatherhead Leisure Centre

If you miss this, you can attend one of the other road shows:

Tues 13th July:

Betchworth Village Hall, Station Road

Wed 14th July:

Boxhill Village Hall, Boxhill Road

Mon 19th July:

John Venus Village Hall, Coldharbour

Wed 21st July:

Capel Village Hall, The Street, Capel

Mon 26th July:

Charlwood Parish Hall, Norwood Hill Road

Tues 27th July:

Dorking Halls

Thurs 29th July:

The Hut, Furlong Road, Westcott

You will be receiving an information leaflet and letter through the post to introduce you to this service. Your new bins will be delivered to your property shortly after you receive this letter. As soon as you receive your bins, you can start to use them and put them out for collection alongside your normal refuse or recycling bin.

For more information visit www.molevalley.gov.uk/foodwaste
or telephone: 01306 879 179

NEW DECISION MAKING ARRANGEMENTS AT MOLE VALLEY DISTRICT COUNCIL

You may have already seen the Council's webpage and replied:
www.molevalley.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8193

If you have not, I apologize for not posting this much sooner. It seems to have got overlooked in the holiday period and the bad weather. We have, however, kindly been allowed until 4th February to submit observations; you should email leaderormayor@molevalley.gov.uk.

Also this will be discussed at our meeting on Monday, 1st February, at 7.00 pm in the Letherhead Institute.

The position may be summarized thus:

The Council currently operates a Leader and Cabinet Executive, but according to the requirements of the Local Government Public Involvement in Health Act 2007), the Council will be required to change its Executive decision making process from May 2011.

The Council can opt for one of two models:

* Leader and Executive Cabinet

* Directly Elected Mayor and Cabinet

Under both models the Leader/Mayor would hold responsibility for all Executive functions and be elected or appointed for a 4 year term (subject to the end of their term of office). He/she would appoint Councillors to a Cabinet and have the option to delegate decision making powers to the Cabinet as a whole or individual Councillors and Officers. The Council would continue to approve the budget, Council policy and set Council Tax levels.

The key difference is how they are appointed and removed from office.

* The directly elected Mayor would not be a Councillor, but chosen in a separate election and would be elected for a four year term.

* The Leader would be a Councillor, elected in the regular local elections and appointed as Leader by the other Councillors (“the Council”). The Council would retain powers to remove the Leader from office in certain circumstances.

The arrangements for decision making in relation to regulatory functions (e.g. licensing, planning) are not Executive responsibilities and will remain unchanged.

The Council must opt for one of the above models by December 2010, for implementation after the next local elections in May 2011.

Currently the LRA Committee favours the directly elected Mayor model.

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

LEATHERHEAD CONSERVATION AREA

What is the future of the Leatherhead Conservation Area?
Should its boundaries change?
What is special and should be conserved?

We are having an

Open Day
On Saturday 16th January
From 10.00 am to 4.30 pm

View proposals from the draft Leatherhead Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan
and tell us what you think.
There will be opportunities to discuss proposals with Council staff and comment on the proposals

Come and see us at
The Library, The Letherhead Institute
67 High Street, Leatherhead

The draft document will be available to view on-line at www.molevalley.gov.uk and comments can be left on-line until Monday 8th February 2010

My impressions of the recent Leatherhead-Ashtead Forum

Last Thursday evening (15th October) we had another Ashtead-Leatherhead Forum. The first item was the Chairman's: "Stop Smoking Campaign." The speaker spoke to the converted, there being apparently no smokers present. We had the usual statistics and learnt that whereas in England (never a mention of the situation in Scotland or Wales) 23% of the population smokes, in Surrey it's only 19.5%. We we told the targets for 2015, among which is one to reduce smoking to 4% for 11 to 15 year olds. I could not help remembering those far off days of my youth when the target was 0% for 11 to 15 year olds."O tempora! O mores!"

We did learn that in Mole Valley, it is 17.2% of the population that smokes - yes, we're far better than England as a whole & are even below the Surrey average. But here's the rub: whereas it's only 13.5% in leafy Leith Hill, it's a whopping 27.9% in North Leatherhead (that's above the average for England!). There was a bit of discussion afterwards about what to do in North Leatherhead - but, as far as I could make out, nothing about the underlying social problems that give rise to the problem in the first place.

Just over half an hour later, Allan Berridge updated us on Neighbour Watch and Sergeant Simon Cox gave police reports for North & South Leatherhead and for Ashtead.

By 8.44 we were ready to listen to the presentation: "Strong Leader/ Elected Mayor - which model?" Apparently, after introducing the current 'Executive model' in March 2008, the 2007 Act requires up to change this to either a "Strong Leader" or "Elected Mayor" model. Wait about! Didn't 2007 come before 2008? So if it was already known that we'd need to change to one of these two models, why did we bother to introduce the Executive model in 2008? Why not leave things as they were while we decided the model to go for?

Also, as I read the title of the talk I could not help wondering why a directly elected mayor was not a strong leader. In fact the more I heard, the more I wondered about the "strong" leader; this leader would be elected from the Councillors by the Councillors - in effect, it means, unless we have a hung Council, from the ruling party by the ruling party. Doesn't that make the "strong" leader a creature of the Council and probably of a political party as well? The powers and functions of both a directly elected mayor & of a Council elected "strong" leader would be much the same: "determine functions delegated to other Cabinet Members, committees of the Executive or officers; determine the size of the Executive; appoint/ remove Executive members." So who, dear reader, will be more effective: a Council elected leader or one elected directly by the people of Mole Valley?

It was also noted that the Council elected "strong" leader with his or her executive Cabinet is not so very different from the Executive model introduced in 2008. One of those present asked if in fact after the period of consultation (to conclude early in 2010 (How early?), the Council need take any notice of the findings. Could they not opt for their chosen model irrespective of consultation? There was no clear answer given. 'Um', I thought, 'why was the Executive model introduced in 2008?'

After this presentation the meeting was asked to vote on whether they wished to continue the present arrangement of electing a third of MVDC each time, as at present, or to have a singled election every four years to elect the whole Council in one go. Yes, folks, you've read aright! We were not asked for a straw poll on the "strong leader" ~ directly elected mayor business that we'd been discussing for nearly three quarters of an hour; we suddenly had sprung on us a straw poll on a different issue. It was pointed out by several members from the floor that we had not discussed the pros and cons of the present system vis-a-vis the one-off election, so what would be the validity of such a vote? What indeed!

By this time it was fast approaching 9.30, when we got to the next item: "Public Question Time." Our LRA planning officer was allowed to ask a question about the recent decision to allow Nos. 52-56 Church Street change of use from retail premises to restaurant. But after this had been answered, it was deemed that we had run over time and no more public questions could be asked. So much for consultation with the public!

How much consultation was there about matters to do with Leatherhead (or, indeed, Ashtead)? We learnt that more people smoke in North Leatherhead then the national average. We heard police reports that are made, in any case, at police panels in North & South Leatherhead and in Ashtead and, if I am not misaken, at the Leatherhead & District Forum. We heard about the "strong leader" ~ directly elected mayor business, which will affect the whole of Mole Valley. Then we were allowed one question only.

Which is a more genuine forum for real consultation: a Council controlled 'area Forum', or the Leatherhead & District Forum which has evolved from grass roots level over many years? Yet our Council refuses to recognize the latter.

If MVDC really wants to save money, why not scrap the Leatherhead-Ashtead and Bookham-Fetcham area fora, which the Residents' Associations never wanted in the first place, and have proper consultation at the Leaherhead & District Forum?

Ashtead-Leatherhead Area Forum Agenda

The next Ashtead-Leatherhead Area Forum to be held on 15th October at 7.30pm in the Christ Church Hall, Epsom Road, Leatherhead, KT22 8ST.

If you would like to view previous agendas, minutes, presentations and information relating to the Forum, please click on the link below:-

http://www.molevalley.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=5709


Agenda
Meeting of: Ashtead - Leatherhead Area Forum
To be held in: the Christ Church Hall, Epsom Road, Leatherhead, KT22 8ST

On: Thursday 15th October at 7.30pm

District Councillors of the Ashtead – Leatherhead Area Forum:
Sylvia Sharland (Chairman), Bridget Lewis-Carr (Vice-Chairman), Bryan Davis, Rosemary Dickson, Bob Hedgeland, Penny Hedgeland, David Howell, Chris Hunt, John Northcott, Chris Reynolds, David Sharland and Chris Townsend.

Invitees:
County Councillors Tim Hall and Chris Townsend, Ashtead Residents’ Association, Leatherhead Residents’ Association, NHS Surrey and Surrey Police

Chairman’s Invitees:
Ashtead Village Traders’ Association, Proprietor of Bartons Bookshop, Leatherhead Area Partnership, Leatherhead Community Association, Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce, Leatherhead Town Centre Manager, The Swan Centre Manager, Surrey County Council – Area Director East

1. Welcome by the Chairman

2. Minutes
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the last meeting of the Forum held on 9th July 2009.

3. Apologies for Absence
To receive apologies for absence.

4. Chairman’s Item – Stop Smoking Campaign
To receive a presentation from Helen Thurlow, who runs the stop smoking campaign for the Primary Care Trust.

5. Police Update
To receive updates from the Neighbourhood Watch Manager, Alan Berridge and Sergeant Simon Cox.

6. Strong Leader / Elected Mayor – which model ?
The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 makes provision for new governance arrangements for all Councils including:-
- A directly elected Mayor
- Strong Leader Model
Mole Valley District Council is required to move to one or other of these two models and wishes to consult with local residents and stakeholders to seek their views. The Leader of the Council, together with representatives from Democratic Services will be in attendance to provide further information and canvass views from those attending the Forum.

7. Public Question Time
To receive public questions at this meeting. Fifteen minutes will be set aside for this purpose.

8. Dates of future Area Forums Meetings
The next meetings of the Ashtead – Leatherhead Area Forum will be held on:-
Thursday 21st January 2010, in the Ashtead Peace Memorial Hall, (Ralli Room),
Woodfield Lane, commencing at 7.30pm
Thursday 22nd April 2010, in the Green Room, Leatherhead Theatre, commencing at
7.30pm

If you require a copy of this agenda, any of the reports within it or a large print version of the agenda, please telephone Arabella Davies on 01306 879137 or
e-mail: arabella.davies@molevalley.gov.uk

Ashtead-Leatherhead Area Forum Agenda

Dear All

The Ashtead-Leatherhead Area Forum Agenda for the next meeting on 22nd April is now available on the Council's website.

Please click on the following link to view the agenda:-

http://www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/p/1/Ashtead_Leatherhead_22nd_April_2009.pdf

(A hard copy of the agenda will be distributed to Mole Valley District Councillors on Thursday 9th April).

With kind regards,

Arabella Davies

Arabella Davies

Democratic Services Manager

tel 01306 879137

arabella.davies@molevalley.gov.uk

A Good use of Public Funds ?

Following this article in the local press -

"Mole Valley council offices could be knocked down to build houses (Thursday, November 06, 2008, 07:00)"

Imagine then, opening Issue Seventeen of the MVNews "The Official Magazine of Mole Valley District Council" on page 5 to find an article describing the refurbishment of the Reception Area at MVDC Offices. The article states " We will continue to provide all the facilities our residents & customers are used to..".

Does this include "possibly" wasting public money in a recession?

Let's hope the possible new home for MVDC is Eco friendly (zero carbon etc) and a real show piece for the area's green credentials. Let's also hope that any new building on the Pippbrook site is also affordable & carbon neutral.

MVDC: Core Strategy (Proposed Submission)

Core Strategy (Proposed Submission) will be available within the following dates:

Start date: 14/11/08 00:01:00 GMT
End date: 09/01/09 16:00:00 GMT

You may view the event here:

http://molevalley-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/cs/cspsd/csps

October 2008 Mole Valley District Council LDF Newsletter

The Newsletter can be viewed on the Councils website at http://www.molevalley.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=4979

If you have any queries regarding the newsletter please contact the Planning Policy Department on ldf@molevalley.gov.uk or phone on 01306 879281.