So said Shula Hebden Lloyd, with exquisite timing, in Thursday’s edition of The Archers, as PoW & the Parishes filed into the stalls of the public gallery for their moment in the spotlight. Needless to say many of the other 120,000 Waverley residents… were out earning a living! The rest obviously support development.
The usual suspects were present and, with one notable exception, not one of them was under 70! And… we suspect they all owned their own homes!! A special prize for guessing which objector this was!
Now we know our readers – many of whose bums were on seats in the aforementioned stalls – wait eagerly to see whether they made the cut and get a mention here but, in the interests of keeping brevity, many will be disappointed. Why? Because, most of the arguments were the same old, same old from the same old, same old – with the emphasis on the OLD! The young, those who actually need homes, were slaving away at work trying to earn enough for a deposit!
Our spider, busy spinning in the Bury’s ceiling was struck by the locals’ sun-kissed complexions. Obviously they don’t spend as much time in the borough as they would have the Inspector believe. Incy-Wincy had never seen so many shades of Cuprinol and Ray Bans outside a St Tropez beach in mid-August!
One ‘lady’, said she represented Ifold, Loxwood & Plaistow parishes and was offended that none of the QCs was remotely inclined to question her so was reduced to challenging, them – somewhat aggressively – over their lack of interest! Clearly, she’d psyched herself up for her 15-minutes of fame and was determined to revel in the moment! It was left to Rumpole – he of the ‘silken tongue,’ if The Stinch was to be believed, – to put her out of her misery and make a few minor enquiries, purely as a matter of good manners you understand.
Gordon MacLean, President of Shalford Cricket Club, was next up. Suffice to say Mr MacLean was worried about recovering his balls – cricket balls, that is!
Alexander Cresswell who, in his Gallery bio, describes himself as ‘an internationally acclaimed artist with a natural fluency with his medium which, coupled with his extraordinary knowledge of architecture and history,..’. clearly thought he knew a thing or two about views and architecture – all entirely self-taught too! Get the picture – no pun intended? Mr Cresswell, who also likes the sound of his own voice, didn’t have anything new to say, just the same old, same old, that he trotted out at the last Inquiry. His dad, the late Sir Michael, would have been horrified by his son’s NIMBY attempt to preserve ‘his’ view from six miles away. When Sir M chaired Waverley’s planning committee, he backed new homes around the borough for those who are now objecting to others who want the same opportunity.
Sarah Sullivan, a self-confessed/self-serving conservationist and designer who wants to preserve Dunsfold Aerodrome’s runways in aspic then took the stage. According to leaks from ‘YW’ officers, Ms Sullivan couldn’t afford to live in the borough but had a lucky break when she netted an old agricultural building in her parents front garden that was ripe for conversion. Waverley Planners objected but a Hascombe councillor fell for Ms Sullivan’s hard-up-hard-luck story and supported her application. Lo-and-behold, she now lives in the very desirable village of Hascombe. But, having achieved her own ambition of a des-res in Waverley, she wants to pull up the drawbridge so no one else can emulate her.
But the person who really takes the juice is OJ. OJ’s naturally oleaginous persona fell away to reveal the nasty under-belly of PoW & the Parishes when, speaking on behalf of Chiddingfold, Hambledon and Hascombe, he not once but twice referred to Dunsfold Park’s proposal to build a new village as the creation of a ‘SINK ESTATE’!
Begging your pardon, Charles William Orange Esq, but we can’t all live in 18th Century Grade II Listed, six-bedroom splendour with an in / out drive! With an awe-inspiring lack of self-awareness, OJ went on to complete the image of the well-to-do middle-class smugness of Waverley’s worried wealthy by referring to the fact that he was only sorry the Inspector had missed the opportunity to see local roads at their most congested because the schools were now all closed for the holidays …
The fee-paying private sector schools that Charles William Orange Esq and his cohorts patronise might have closed but the state schools that serve those who will be living on the so-called Dunsfold Park ‘SINK ESTATE’ are still open!
Tell us, OJ – ‘cos we’re all dying to know – as a director of Buchanan Real Estate Plc, Grosvenor Waterside Developments and Millbay Developments whose lawns have you been parking your concrete mixers on? As a well known local NIMBY, we assume it must be some other poor sod’s back yard!
Patrick Molyneux, (Bramley Parish Council), was nothing short of a swivel-eyed sensationalist in his oratory. His pitch became increasingly hysterical and in a tone reminiscent of the voice-over for a B-List horror movie, he actually admitted to, ‘Not having the facts …’ Never was a truer word spoken!
Predictably, both Anthony Isaacs, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, and Clive Smith, of Surrey Hills AONB, were opposed to the development. Although it’s hard to take the pair of them seriously when they’re known locally as ‘Rent-A-View’. In a nutshell, their views / opinions are varied and variable … and for sale to the highest bidder. It’s a well known fact, much sniggered over locally, that having objected consistently, repeatedly and vociferously to Lakshmi Mittal’s proposals to build a £30 million country pile with two huge towers, resembling oast houses, slap-bang in the middle of the Surrey Hills AONB, despite all their posturing, they rolled over when presented with a hefty cheque by the steel magnate billionaire. Just goes to show, everyone’s got their price and the Dunsfold Developer just needs to take a leaf out of Mittal’s book and up his offer!
Clive Smith droned on … and on … causing Councillor John Gray to doze off while others stifled their yawns. When asked by Rumpole if he had attended the Local Plan Inquiry. Mr Smith said, without even a smidgeon of irony, that he found it, very frustrating having to sit and listen to other people’s views! And this after the Chamber had sat listening to Mr Smith’s views for nigh on half an hour! Oh to see ourselves as others see us …
Paul Osborne, from Hydestile, who, having made a nice life for himself and his family in Waverley, doesn’t want anyone else to. He’s firmly in favour of pulling up the drawbridge too, and he roundly chided the Dunsfold Developer for not offering suitable employment for his son, a biologist. ‘Where’s he going to work? he sneered, ‘Cranleigh Freight?’ Why so disparaging, Mr Osborne? What’s wrong with working for Cranleigh Freight? A family owned business that grew from a kitchen table start-up to a 250-employee enterprise is a local company that the borough is justly proud of. But, clearly, that’s not good enough for Mr Osborne’s son! The Waverley Web is no expert on the businesses at Dunsfold Park but if Mr Osborne had taken the trouble to read the Dunsfold Planning application he might have noticed that there are a diverse range of companies based at Dunsfold Park, including fuel cell technology and bio-waste solutions. Maybe, just maybe, the clue’s in the name?
At the end of his tirade, Mr Osborne announced he was moving! We’ve said it before and, no doubt, we’ll say it again before this Inquiry is over,
You couldn’t make it up!
Paul Sutcliffe declared that he’d been accosted in Waitrose, only yesterday, by a local landowner who had land for 100 houses that he’d been begging ‘YW’ to consider, and, there were dozens more like him. Sadly, like so many before him, Mr Sutcliffe didn’t get the irony of his statement. The reason local landowners like Waitrose Man can’t interest the Council in their land is because people like Mr Sutcliffe will be the first to object when Waitrose Man actually puts in a planning application to build 100 homes!
Then came Ceceila Sanders, a breath of fresh air! Not only did she wish to speak in favour of the Dunsfold Park project but she spoke briefly and succinctly, pointing out that, in her view, Dunsfold Park presented a very real opportunity to ‘protect our Waverley’.
The Inspector, who has demonstrated a light touch and a well-honed sense of humour throughout the first week of the Inquiry, expressed the hope that Ms Sanders would not need a bodyguard as she left the Chamber!
14 thoughts on “The Big ‘D’ brings out the best in ‘Your Waverley.’”
How will I cope without my daily installment of country folk for the next 2 days?
How will the WW cope without your comments – enjoy the rest.
Fancy that! This bunch of Farnham based hypocrites calling Ms S one. You’ve just gone over stuff you’ve posted before, perhaps you’re the ones over 70 as you appear to be repeating yourselves.
SS made use of an old building and did not add to the area’s housing, also being local anyway has not added to traffic either.
Hypocrites because you don’t want more housing around Farnham, somewhere where the homes are really needed and with good transport links already in place. They need some investment to improve the A31 and around the station but all perfectly viable.
Or perhaps you would like to form your own Council. Considering Cranleigh and Farnham are so far apart, a split seems like a good idea for both our sakes. You can take WBC and we can form afresh from folk that care.
What you fail to say is that the people you mention owning homes are the people that actually want to do something for the rest of us. They are probably retired and have the time on their hands to do this, if they don’t, nobody else will.
I applaud them.
If you read the Local Plan, you would see for yourself how many homes will, and already are, being built in and around Farnham. Once the Inspector delivers his final decision, we suspect that figure will rise. He has already notified WBC that its projections for the borough’s housing needs are higher than estimated.
Farnham is no friend of Waverley Borough Council. It presented a Petition to Her Majesty the Queen seeking permission to leave the Waverley Borough. It’s residents have removed most of its Conservative councillors from Surrey County Council, some of the Tory borough councillors, and hopefully, in the future more fair and independent minded people will follow its lead. Candidates should put themselves up for election in other parts of the borough – Godalming – Haslemere and Cranleigh. That is the only way we will get change. Because… No Local Plan … No Say! Your Waverley has no adopted Local Plan, which is why we are in this damn awful mess.
I am so amused by people who have views but can’t put their full name!
WW – Yet again you are slipping to the West…. Please I need your info to be impartial! Not everyone in the East is OLD and retired some of us are still Working and trying to make a living here. I may be on Hols – But I am still listening… PLEASE be a tad more factual – as you know I am an A**** Retard and Like facts not Fiction
Best as ever
D (fullname supplied!)
Believe us when we assure you we are NOT slipping to the West. Waverley has a housing issue – FACT. WBC has consistently under-provided homes FACT. Waverley has had two failed Daft Local Plans and could be facing the catastrophic failure of a third!
Waverley has a legal duty to contribute towards meeting un-met need in neighbouring boroughs FACT. To meet projected employment growth, homes must be provided somewhere FACT. It is Government policy (ignored by MP Anne Milton) that homes must be provided on Brown Field sites, before green field sites, if t available FACT. The Waverley Web stands by its long-held view that the largest brownfield site in the borough should be developed, rather than covering the countryside with concrete. We have never deviated from this view!
Sadly, the Waverley Borough has one of the highest number of residents, aged over 65, than most borough’s in the country – FACT. We have said in this post, and may past posts, that the young cannot clamber onto the housing ladder, let alone climb up it. Perhaps everyone should attend these public inquiries and hear for themselves, the FACTS.
You are not an Alfold re*****d! You are a highly intelligent woman who seeks a life in the beautiful countryside. Thakeham Homes want to destroy that by building around you, when just a couple of hundred yards away homes could be built at Dunsfold thereby preventing the countryside, including the Green Belt, being sacrificed throughout the borough of Waverley.
Hope the sun shines on you. WW
Denise, your comments are always so good to read and as always you put your full name to it.
If those moaning about me being less formal bothered to check, you would see that I have used my full name in the past.
Rather, vent your frustration at those that hide their identity behind WW
In response to your criticism Jamie, we are too are very sorry that this is necessary. However, our team includes many Waverley insiders, who, suffice to say, would be out on their ear if their masters discovered their identity! Much of Waverley decision making is made in secret, and any local involvement is discouraged.
The Waverley Web, followed the sudden closure of Waverley Matters/Mutters, just over a year ago because we wanted to shine a light into the darker corners of ‘Your Waverley.’ Perhaps you do not realise how secretive local government has become? Even ‘some’ councillors cannot obtain vital information from officers to enable them to make well-informed decisions. Some of our local newspapers are still doing an amazing job, but investigative journalism on local papers is reducing.
My sincere apologies Jamie maxwell I have not notice your name before and in relation to WW, I do not blame them keeping their names out of it, there was another site before called Waverley Matters (mutters) and the WBC found out who they were and had it closed down as they did not like the truth being told.
The sun was shining rather too much today so ended up doing endless chores… But always a joy to come in at night and read the posts here (OH can’t cope with sun and is snoozing already…………- Light weight)
WW – I promise if DP LTD offered more than the paltry Infrastructure for Roads, Sewage etc – That we know is going to take years before they come into effect Along with all the other Promises of wonderful Community benefits, I would not have such a gripe about it – But they DON’T – You know that as well as I do they are MINOR road changes and a promise of a bus that is Higly unlikely to ever become Viable – I agree Build here – But for goodness sakes – Put something into the Village first.
SCC Need to come up with something for the roads and lack of Public Transport – When they do maybe we wont have to keep going through this.
I get Brownfield – but you too have to Get Greenbelt.
I hope DP does offer lots of jobs for Local and Borough-wide People – I hope it does become (In reality) the Largest Employer in the Borough – Let’s say Single….I hope the Medical facility opens soon so we don’t have the issues we have now – and I hope the Primary school is open before most the young people need to go to secondary school.
Sorry I am a bit selfish – as I have had sewage coming up outside my Kitchen and someone drive almost into my Drive (saved by the Huge Hedge) the other day as Alfold Crossways is one of the most ridiculous junctions ever… They put conditions into Planning that are not met – so I have no faith in any of them
You are right I moved here for a change from London – That doesn’t make me SW-Yummy it makes me someone that fell in love with this part of the country almost 3 years ago – But I have worked over 30 years to get here… – I do contribute to the local community and I will continue to Support Alfold/Dunsfold and Cranleigh – Because there simply aren’t enough Loud Mouths here
Forget the Horlicks – Tonight requires a Large Glass of Wine!!!
As ever keep me posted and hang on in there………………….
Enjoy that wine, and we pledge, if the Secretary of State approves Dunsfold and it does not keep its promises, we will come down on them like one ton of those bricks they intend to use!
Now, get out on that subbed, and we here at the WW will do our best not to give you more distressing news – however, we can’t promise.
So sorry still Enjoyng my wine and Chatting to my Twiggy/ House Sitters
S.o.S: If he does approve it – and I am still 50/50 if he will … It will be a 10-20 year fight to ensure DP deliver – It seems to be fairly obvious that S106’s are Useless and that worries me more with this Development than any other (even those that can’t be bothered to sign them!) as so much hinges on them… I am not convinced they are going to be worth the paper they are written on even if they do!
There is no point Winging about it after the event if it all goes tits up – It will be nobody’s problem but Alfolds/Dunsfolds – It wont be the “New Settlements” issues it will be the issue of the the small villages that will have to deal with this.
It is Not fair to put his HUGE developement on this Village without a Serious Commitment from WBC/SCC that they will wholeheartly Support it And I am NOT talkiing about the fact they put it in the Local Plan – That was Just LAZY
So if things do go wrong THEY are accountable – so far I have heard nothing.. And they will always be winging about lack of Funds Etc……You of all people know this with your own issues with Farnham’s Brightwell’s Issue – We shouldn’t be accepting this Shoddy work From WBC and you don’t want it in Farnham – Why do you seem to think it is OK Here.???
Until You do think it will be different – I will continue to be against it – Have a think WW – You have fought so valiently for Farnham and quite right too… Think about us here – Just for a minute and ask yourself – If this development had been on a Brownfeild Site in Farnham/Hindhead/Haselmere – Would you have honestly been so in favour of it?