HINDHEAD could soon be home to a 50 luxury new flats and nine dwellings if a controversial planning application is granted permission by borough councillors. As previously reported by The Herald, Waverley Borough Council has received plans to demolish The Beacon in Tilford Road to be replaced with a new housing development. The site is currently being used as a residential training centre for Lloyds Bank. However, at a southern area development control sub-committee meeting last Wednesday, borough councillors argued against the removal of an employment site to be replaced by expensive housing. "We have had commercial land, employment land, disappearing everywhere with dormitories appearing all over the borough, said borough councillor David Harmer. "Removing employment land has an inevitable result of more car transport as public transport is not strong enough to be used instead." Planning officer Ann Wright pressed that using the land for housing was the only viable alternative. "The owner needs to make the best use of the premises," she said. "It was marketed as commercial premises but it only received three offers. We are satisfied that there is a sufficient trail of proper consideration." Although the application marks a departure from the local development plan, Mrs Wright advised the council that the current level of housing is only slightly above that outlined in the plan. "This would not swamp the market, there is a need for this level of housing in the borough," she said. Borough councillor Peter Harmer pointed out that there is a lack of affordable housing in the Hindhead area and that this site should be considered for this purpose instead. "There is a large number of young people with no chance of getting on to the housing ladder. "It is an absolute disgrace that we are not insisting on affordable housing. The opportunity will be lost to the detriment, and no advantage, to the village." Mrs Wright said that this site would not be suitable for affordable housing as it is slightly isolated from local amenities and the site would incur high service charges. "The gardeners' maintenance costs nearly £1,000 a year," chairman Peter Isherwood supported. "Affordable housing occupants wouldn't be eligible for a grant so (the houses) would be out of reach of those we are trying to help in the area." However, this was contested by Mr Harmer saying that service charges are aligned with the type of property. "There is no reason why we can't structure the service charges with the properties; that's the usual practice. "In such a development people will pay different amounts based on location and size," Mr Harmer pressed. "Social housing should be dealt with before property for sale or lease." Mr Harmer also argued that the site is not isolated from local amenities as there is a bus stop outside the development. He also said that another affordable housing site in nearby Wood Road had gone ahead and had not deemed as isolated. Mr Harmer was not alone in thinking that affordable housing is required in the area. "I support everything that Mr Harmer says," said borough councillor John Robini. "We need to build affordable housing in the future. We have a clear minimum of 30 per cent but I would like to see more. "I would like to see affordable housing on the site and I would be against anything that doesn't [provide this]." Many councillors also felt that affordable housing should not be separated from more expensive housing developments. "Affordable housing shouldn't be in ghettos," said borough councillor David Inman. "There is no reason why not to have a proper allocation on this site." Although vice-chairman James Mackie supported this argument, he felt that housing would be the only suitable use for the site at present. "Affordable houses are indistinguishable. They are built to the same standard by the same people," said Mr Mackie. "I appreciate Mr Harmer's argument but a viable alternative for employment has not yet come about." The application has now been passed onto development control for further consideration in light of an inclusion of an affordable housing quota.