Who is up for a fight! But needs to get her facts right! Read this tosh that is now circulating the area!
A regular reader sent us the above note, from some daft bird called Daphne Robinson – the aforementioned ‘extremely pissed-off woman.
For Christ’s sake Daffers, it’s all very well going around spouting off about ‘Power to the People’ but you need to be sure you know your arse from your elbow before you let rip! If you don’t you’ll become known locally as that Daft Bird Daphne! And you don’t want that, do you?!
Where on earth did you get this tripe from? Have you been looking at the Dunsfold Park planning application or have you simply been talking to your neighbour across the garden fence, who heard it from their daughter, who got it from her cousin’s Aunty Ethel twice removed?
Even PoW & the Parishes couldn’t make this up – although they had a damn good try, at the Public Inquiry and, in the process, made some old codger from the cricket club look a right ass!
So sit down, Daffers, make yourself a nice cup of coffee, break out the ginger nuts, and let us explain matters to you.
As everyone over there in the East all know, the Shalford roundabout in question is one of the daftest arrangements known to local residents. Who else, but Surrey CC would force traffic coming out of Broadford Road to turn left – when it wants to go right – and navigate a roundabout before sending it back in the same direction it’s just come from? This, in turn, creates a log-jam because traffic waiting on the A281 to turn right into Broadford Road, holds up traffic going south towards Bramley. It’s a complete bugger’s muddle!
As we understand it, Shalford Cricket Pitch is not being touched in any way. This was explained at the Dunsfold Park Inquiry when someone from Shalford Cricket Club was worried about losing his balls – although our correspondent doubted he had any! It was pointed out to him that the brief widening of the A281 and the creation of a new roundabout at Broadford Road would eradicate the current problems and improve traffic flow, thus eliminating delays at that point.
This is all happening on the opposite side of the road to the Common and the cricket pitch, where there is currently nothing more than a ditch. Surely, this proposal is an improvement that we would all welcome?
You really should be more careful, Daffers. We know you’re a pissed-off but that’s because you’re misinformed. Get your facts right! Otherwise, you’re going to become known locally as the woman who opens her mouth before she engages
her duck brain – or do you?
WW – Stop being so cruel!! Yes there is misinformation out there but it is hardly surprising with the amount of Paperwork that the DP application has generated – no wonder people think all kinds of things. As you rightly point out the Broadford Junction is currently rubbish and obviously designed by a true DAFFER and again you are right that they are proposing to take some land from the side of the road Opposite the Cricket Pitch and so far they have confirmed that none of the Common land on the side of the Cricket pitch will be affected. But until this is all signed and sealed – Which they are giving themselves YEARS to sort out – then we don’t really know what this will look like do we? The scheme has still to be agreed.
FInally as this does not need to be delivered until the COMPLETION of the 500th Home this could be around 2022 – by then there could be at least an additional 500 cars on the road heading for Guildford, Woking and beyond.
We are not being Cruel!! We are being open, honest and transparent – which is more than can be said for some. We here at the WW acknowledge everyone’s right to disagree, make their comments on and object to the huge amount of development that is being Dumped on the East of the Borough. But to make outrageous, untrue and frankly very damaging claims about certain developers’ proposals is just not on. Yes, of course you are quite within your rights to mistrust every single thing a developer says and does, but at least give them the benefit of the doubt and let them TRY!
How many developers do you know that are intending to improve the A281 at four or is it five separate junctions? That’s right None! But it certainly isn’t stopping them getting planning consents – another 200 or so homes destined for Cranleigh – making the figure 1,700.
We here at the Waverley Web have no allegiance to Dunsfold Park or any other developer for that matter – but we have said and will continue to maintain that Waverley’s Brownfield sites should be developed, before the Green belt and the countryside, are sacrificed!
As in dual?
Last one – I Promise as OH BBQing but as I said Not everyone reads the reams of stuff that I do – and people are scared of what they “Think” may be happening to their Villages…Not everyone is good on the Internet – I know my elderly Father cannot deal with it anymore – so don’t blame them for not getting all the facts quite right… People in the East are Very scared of what is happening in Cranleigh and see their ownn villages under attack because – we HAVE NO GREENBELT PROTECTION (or very litle) as I have said before and I will say again GREENBELT was designed to stop URBAN conurbations joinng up. As we dont have ANY we don’t have GREENBELT -Stop making it sound as if GREENBELT is the something Hugely Precious – It isn’t always sometimes it is just a feild that separates two Council Areas……
Can we try to get this back into perspective – I quote from the Website:
Green belt land refers to an area that is kept in reserve for an open space, most often around larger cities. The main purpose of the green belt policy is to protect the land around larger urban centres from urban sprawl, and maintain the designated area for forestry and agriculture as well as to provide habitat to wildlife.
Green belt offers a number of benefits for both urban and rural population. By preventing the urban sprawl, it helps protect agricultural activities and the unique character of rural communities. Urban population, on the other hand, is provided an access to an open space which offers opportunities for outdoor activities and an access to clean air.
As ever
Denise
That villagers are afraid – very afraid – comes as no surprise to any of us. Sadly, here at the Waverley Web we have predicted this ever since this site was created. NO LOCAL PLAN = NO CONTROL!
Sadly, the East of the borough does not benefit from the protected areas enjoyed by other parts of the borough. But let’s pose a – what if?
If the Secretary of State kicks out the Dunsfold Park scheme and it still remains brownfield site – other types of development will almost certainly go ahead there.
But where will the houses go?
To Alfold – Dunsfold village – almost certainly to Cranleigh another thousand or so? Yes the people there have every reason to be scared, very scared.
Dear WW
I am not ignoring the fact the Local Plan is rubbish – But I dispute the fact that the West have been given the same proportial amount of Development because of the GreenBelt issue and that is simply UNFAIR – We are all afraid of what is going on due to the lack of a Sensible Local Plan – But you HAVE to remember that the percentage of Voters in the East is tiny compared to you in the West so please do not pretend to be dispassionate about this.
And by the way to say the Quiet A281 is ridiculous – I live ON IT – it is not quiet at any time so please do not pretend it is a little rural road on one hand then compare it to the A31 on the other DOH! It IS a small single lane A road that is bally busy so please get your facts right – Maybe it is about time YOU drove on it and tried it in the morning – I said earlier that I don’t commute more than 1.5 times a week – But I still have to visit the Docs/Hospital and Vets regularly and just trying to get out of our drive onto it is a nightmare at any time – Due to the rubbish junction at the Crossways.
You say Farnham have taken on too much –
But can you please tell me what proportion of the WBC Local Plan; Farnham, Hindhead, Haslemere and Godalming are taking of the Total LP proposal? If not I will – You may have mentioned it before but do refresh my memory – Getting old and forgetful!!
As ever
Denise
We are posting on this shortly – so all the figures will be before you in a table. As for the A281. We will check the Department of Transport Figures and tell you exactly how busy the A281 actually is.
However, we have driven it, and only claim that in comparison with other roads in the county it is comparatively less busy. Of course, if you actually live on a main A road, then of course, we fully understand how you must feel and sympathise with your plight.
Goody – You know how I love figures!
But to return to my previous comment. The A281 IS a busy road – Obviously not as busy as the A3 or the A31 – but that is not the only issue – it is the size of it – it is a single lane road, and so if a bus breaks down as happened a few weeks ago near the Weyside Pub just outside Guildford, the traffic was queued back all the way to Birtley just outside Bramley as traffic was struggling to overtake it. On this occasion it was after 9am, so what would it be like at 7.30 or 8am?
It is not uncommon to have similar tailbacks caused by the delivery trucks in Bramley – I know deliveries have to be made and bin men need to remove rubbish, but when it happens at 8.45 in the morning – when lazy cummuters like me are on the road it does cause serious problems and I for one would not want to live in Bramley and have to breath in those traffic fumes.
Over taking cyclists is also an issue. The A281 is a popular route for cyclists especially in the summer and I dread it when I see them as on some parts of the route, the road is too narrow to be able to overtake safely with on coming traffic from the opposite direction, so I don’t and then get honked at!
As for the roads to Godalming they are tiny B roads and I would not like to be on them when two buses meet!
Some of DP’s proposed Junction improvements will undoubtably improve them – as to be quite honest they couldn’t get much worse …. but they will not mitgate the huge increase in the volume of traffic no matter what they say in their TA’s. Other reports have disproved their figures.
I am sure the proposed bus services to Cranleigh, Godalming, Guildford and eventually Horsham (by the time the 1100 home is occupied) will be useful to the new homeowners and locals as well – But you still have the issue of large buses on small roads. I am guessing the Cranleigh route will be via Alfold Road or Wildwood Lane??? Hmmmm Bus meets Cranleigh Brickworks lorry!!
My final concern on the proposed Bus Service is that it states and I quote ” The bus services (A-D) will be split into four parts as the population of the development increases, all of which may be amended from time to time by the Transport Review Group..”
Which will comprise of 1x SCC member, 1x WBC member, 1 x DAL and 1 x Travel Plan manager employed by DAL
Phased Bus services: note Sunday includes appropriate Public Holidays and journeys both ways and approx delivery dates from Troy Planning so poss add 1 year as report dated November 2016
Bus service A. is “A flexible bus service to serve the site designed around the needs of new residents and employees working at the existing buildings or non-residential units..”
What on earth does that mean??? –
To be delivered by the time the 50th home is occupied. (Approx 2020 – 2021)
Bus service B. is
Guildford & Godalming Hourly: 06:00 – 23:00 mon/sat – Sunday 08:00 – 20:00
Cranleigh Hourly 06:00 – 07:00 & 19:00 – 23:00 mon/sat – Sunday 08:00 – 20:00
Cranleigh 1/2hourly 07:00 – 19:00 mon/sat
to be delivered by the time 100 homes are Occupied. (Appox 2020-2021)
Bus Service C
Guildford,Godalming & Cranleigh – 1/2 hourly 07:00 – 19:00 Mon/sat
Guildford, Godalming & Cranleigh Hourly 06:00 – 07:00 & 19:00 – 23:00 mon/sat – Sunday 08:00 – 20:00
To be delivered when 400 homes are occupied. (Approx 2022)
Bus Service D is
Cranleigh – service every 15mins 07:00 – 19:00 mon/sat
Cranleigh – 1/2 Hourly 06:00 – 07:00 & 19:00 – 23:00 mon/sat, 08:00 – 20:00 sunday
Guildford, Godalming & Horsham: 1/2hourly 07:00 – 19:00 mon/sat
Guildford, Godalming & Horsham: Hourly 06:00 – 07:00 & 19:00 – 23:00 mon/sat – Sunday 08:00 – 20:00 Sunday
To be delivered when 1100 homes are Occupied. (approx 2025)
It would be intersting to see how popular the new hourly Arriva X1 Guildford/Horsham route is that started in May 2017 Monday to Friday..
Oh Dear Denise! You are overtaxing our feeble brains again!!
Are you happier about all the homes currently being built in Horsham and whose residents are now regularly using the A281?
In which case – perhaps Horsham District Council should be taking Waverley Borough Council’s unmet need. But that won’t help to house Waverley people will it…And they will all still use the A281 because, that is the Horsham to Guildford Road. FACT!
Perhaps SCC/WSCC should get together and build a huge flyover starting at Alfold and ending up in Guildford?
No I am not happy with all the homes in Horsham, alas – I wasn’t around when they were agreed, but I do believe they do have a train station, so I would hope that at least some of them will be using it to get to work/play etc..
2 trains per hour to London Victoria via Gatwick Airport (limited stop)
1 train per hour to London Victoria via Dorking, Epsom and Sutton.
2 trains per hour to London Bridge via Gatwick Airport (stopping)
1 train per hour to Southampton Central, running fast to Barnham
1 train per hour to Portsmouth Harbour, running fast to Barnham
2 trains per hour to Bognor Regis, 1 stopping at all stations and 1 running semi-fast to Barnham.
They also have the A24, and M25 and M23 within a reasonable distance. I don’t know the figures for how many people living in Horsham work in Guildford and how many in London, Crawley, Brighton etc.. But I think if I was to move to Horsham those would quite possibly be the areas I would be working in
Sadly non of these services get Horsham residents to work in Guildford – do they. Unless of course they travelled on the A24 onto the M25 at Leatherhead and then onto the A3 to get to Guildford- and who would do that?
And… remember that numerous people from Godalming, Guildford and all the eastern villages work in Horsham and at Gatwick and travel along the A281.
Waverley is not an island! Although many would like it to be.
As I said I don’t know the numbers commuting from Horsham to Guildford but the Horsham website says………..
4.3.3. TRAVEL TO WORK
Horsham district has a large net commuting outflow of around 10,000 (26,688 outbound compared to 16,728 inbound). London and Crawley are the largest commuter targets, with large numbers also commuting to the rest of West Sussex, parts of Surrey and Brighton. High percentages of both in- and out-commuters use private vehicles (cars, vans, taxis, motorbikes etc.) in their commute, reflecting the difficulties of using public transport in the district, especially in rural areas [28] [29]. Of the nearby districts with a similar rural/urban mix, Horsham’s net commuting is comparable to Mid Sussex, although substantially higher than Chichester, which could be down to the distance of Chichester from London.
so no specific figures for Guildford, but neither do they state that Guildford is a prominant place to commute from Horsham…..
But I digress the issue is not about Horsham, but what is planned in this part of Waverley Of course people commute from all over the borough and I am sure there are many in the East of the borough that work in Horsham – but that doesn’t mean that building another 2600 homes without offering a significant improvement to the transport system is viable. There are many in Farnham that would like to see the full 3400 homes built at DP – Now isn’t that kind?? and obviously what all 40,000 odd residents voted for when given the option to in the ridiculous consultation paper which put DP in 3 of the 4 options! Please do not try and muddy the water… The West of the Borough wants it all here in the East and I say it again – there are far more of YOU in the West than there are here in the East
First. A s106 Agreement is a LEGAL AGREEMENT, if the pledges made are not carried out, building homes must STOP IMMEDIATELY!
This is not an EAST – v- WEST issue. The fact is, whether we like it or not – the East does not have the planning policies that protect and constrain development. The Inspector was not convinced that there was any justification to add land to increase the green belt in either Farnham or Cranleigh. Take a trip to Farnham and see for yourself how restricted the development area is due to its proximity to the Thames Basin heathland. But then perhaps as one Cranleigh councillor suggested, if the endangered birds took flight, development could take please there!
Would everyone prefer developers to throw in as many small, individual applications dotted all around the countryside around the eastern villages – or just Cranleigh – without any mitigation measures put in place? Then have them refused by WBC and let a series of Government ~Inspectors grant consent at appeal? Because that is what is happening now and this hurts everyone.
WW I have said so many times what s106 Agreements are and what they will mean in 5 years time – Please YOU look at the facts. The Cranleigh councillor was probably taking a leaf out of WBC’s book in saying that “ancient woodland can be re-planted”!