The Protestors protested – the Experts Examined – and the Moaners – did what they always do – they moaned and they moaned on and on….for over four long hours!
But The Dunsfold Park planning application for 1,800 houses and accompanying business use and an amazing package of £35m worth of Infrastructure was granted by 10 votes to eight. However, we here at the Waverley Web expect the anti’s will antagonise and the protesters will keep protesting until Nelson Gets his Eye Back!
One thing is certain the future isn’t orange – despite Charlie’s protestations! (aka Charles Orange The Chairman of Hascombe Parish Council or Protect Our Waverley as he is known locally. We’ve heard that his group is now turning its attention on protecting the countryside in Farnham – around Haslemere and in Cranleigh?
Nothing really changes does it? Dunsfold’s very own nonagenarian sat knitting at the guillotine (not that we would recognise her, so she may have been tucked up at home with a Horlicks) as Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee waded through paperwork that could resurface the A281 Horsham/Guildford road end to end.
She gave Alfold Councillor Kevin De’Anus strict instructions before he left home saying: I put you there – now deliver the goods. Why? because the Alfold Parish Councillor lives on the approach road to Dunsfold Park, never declares a pecuniary interest and will not give up fighting her corner until the old lady sings!
Of course we were there! We expect you spotted at least four of our Waverley Web’ers who were listening to the noises off – and there were plenty of those! It was bad inside Waverley Towers – but the language outside was fitting only for the docks!
Of course we couldn’t possibly comment – but do these people who dish the dirt on the Flying Scotsman actually know the man? We certainly don’t – but after tonight’s slanderous banter in the back row – we might just give him a call!
Well now it’s all over bar … even more shouting, the Waverley Webber’s can now turn their sights onto the next round of Louisa M Alcott’s tale of … What Dunsfold Did and What Dunsfold Did Next?
But in the meantime (until we prepare a more detailed post) – we are signing off for a nice gin and tonic and a lie down – and to bathe our bloodshot eyes with Optrex!
Sorry WW – I thought you were more impartial than this – You are quite obviously biased and I know you are now happy – would have been better if you had taken this with Good Grace and not rubbed our noses in it- do you really need to be quite so unkind? – I expected better of WW than this
Of course we are biased – the WW has always said there was a simple choice here. Development in the Countryside or on a huge Brownfield site and we, and obviously many others including the Government believe our countryside should be protected for as long as possible.
Forgive us for our moment of truth – we were at the hearing – and some very unpleasant and derogatory and personal remarks were made about the developers – who we do not know – and probably never will! However, we shall be watching them very carefully to ensure they keep their promises and honour their commitments. WW
Even a Farnham elected member had the wit to question the rubbish peddled by the idiot officers and the Surrey plank. But most just kept quiet and followed the party line. Didn’t that happen sometime in the late 30s somewhere in Europe?
Bunch of hapless idiots. Most councillors live In Farnham and without the Chair vote doing what is expected means there was 1 vote in favour. Pathetic. I have never seen total incompetent advisors and conclusions. The planning advisors mostly said we don’t know and not know what will all come out in the detail until you approve it. Be good to look back at the two locals that supported each other, (lady in Farnham and Cranleigh we think as usual) Not biased at all!!! Watch the video. The locals are not for this and it is not going away. The two witches of East and West do not represent us. This will go to a much higher court and even you probably know what that means.
All of them should be ashamed. Especially the self proclaimed defensive of green space who continues to make massive false claims of their ideology.
Interesting that you and your great pal Mary never declare her interest in Springbok and why that may influence her opinion in the very close, direct and positive involvement in Dunsfold Park and why the hasty move from Alfold Council a few years back. Why did she move to Cranleigh? Again maybe you know her and the Dunsfold developers better than us. We just don’t believe either of you any more.
The Waverley Web has no association with Cranleigh Councillor Mary Foryszewski – we have just listened to what she has been saying for years. Her obvious support for DP will undoubtedly ensure that WBC has a stronger case against the Springbok development when it goes to appeal.
The duplicity of some councillors who have quite recklessly voted through totally unsuitable developments on narrow country lanes, and on flood plains in and around Farnham/Godalming and Cranleigh and then oppose a Brownfield site is breathtaking.
We over here at the WW have been contacted by numerous Alfold and Dunsfold residents who are right behind the Dunsfold Plan – even more so now they realise that £35m of improvements will be made to the local infrastructure. Remember Farnham is taking over 2,500 homes too – and without the benefit of brownfield sites!
WW is sorry for your disappointment, and does not believe that everything said and done in the name of Dunsfold Park is always right – but the principal of development there is a no brainer.
Doh. Have you overlooked the connection with M and Springbok?
No – we haven’t overlooked this. But the application was refused by the planning officers under their delegated powers – and she didn’t call it in? did she?