NEW plans have been submitted for a dementia care home in Effingham.
In May, the Minton Group was refused permission for a 72-bed home on land beside Church Street and Lower Road – but the firm has now submitted a new application for a 60-bed facility.
The company, which carried out a public consultation in November and December, is confident the latest plan will be approved by Guildford Borough Council – but opponents have branded the renewed application a "fool's errand".
Director Adam Simpkin told the Advertiser: "Hundreds of people in the area have told us how important these proposals are to local families, older people and those with dementia.
"Independent studies also show there is an acute need for more care places in Effingham.
"We have made significant changes to the original plans, reducing the height, size and number of anticipated car journeys, to ensure the proposals blend in with the local area."
As well as the reduced number of beds, the new plan includes reducing floor space by 20 per cent.
If the application is approved at a planning meeting, a date for which has not yet been set, construction work could start in autumn and be completed in late 2014.
But opponents of the application said the changes make "no difference", as the original plans were rejected due to the site being on green belt land surrounded by listed buildings.
Kevin Ladywell, of Norwood Road, Effingham, said: "They can dress up it up as much as they want and take a couple of rooms away but they are missing the whole point.
"The village of Effingham is not against it being a large care home, but it being built in the most inappropriate site in the whole village.
"What they are now proposing makes no difference; not to mention the site is outside the settlement area and inside the conservation area.
"They are wasting their time, our time and the council's time with this fool's errand."
But fellow villager Nina Bracewell supports the care home and said opponents were more concerned with "the view from their garden than their elderly relatives".
"It is utter nimbyism," she said. "The site is prime real estate and is going to be used by something somewhere down the line, so why not something that serves the village?"
