Another shameful night for ‘Your Waverley and its officers aided an abetted by a company that has poured money into Tory coffers and also aims to build over 500 homes over Alfold’s countryside too!
Will the last person to leave Cranleigh get the boats out? Because yet another round of ‘Your Waverley’s dirty work has been done.
Cranleigh Residents, parish and borough councillors and the Civic Society, fought tirelessly to stop one of the most controversial applications ever to be considered by Waverley Planners. But, they failed by 10 votes to 8, with two abstentions to stop Thakeham Homes building 54 homes in Elmbridge Road. Members of the Joint Planning Committee from the rest of the borough stood shoulder to shoulder to approve the scheme, demonstrating they don’t give a damn about increasing Cranleigh flooding problems, the size of homes to be built there, or the stench young families will have to endure.
OH! and by the way there is no history on flooding in 2013. COMPLETE SILENCE FROM THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY. Despite the fact that its officers visited the site! Stitch up – or what?
Satisfied by planners and experts, (there were so many of them in the chamber it was like the charge of the light brigade) that floodwater would not reach more than 25 metres from the new homes, councillors chose to ignore the impact the developer’s scheme could have on every other property in Elmbridge, including homes on the adjacent Knowle Park Initiative site still to receive detailed consent.
Cranleigh councillor Mary Foryszewski warned her colleagues, future generations of Cranleigh people will hold them responsible for the decisions they make. And she was joined by her Cranleigh colleagues, Jeannette and Stewart Stennett, and Liz Townsend (who spoke but had no vote).
Once again, a Cranleigh councillor Mike Band from Shamley Green, together with Wonersh councillor, Michael ‘Sleepy’ Goodridge and Bramley’s By-Pass Byham all supported building on a site in the full knowledge that it could put people’s lives at risk and where, they were warned, homes could be uninsurable.
The treacherous bunch of Tory tossers revealed for all to see, that they were quite prepared to accept fiddled figures based on dodgy data from The Environment Agency, Thames Water and Thakeham Homes, rather than photographic and personal evidence provided by the people who actually live with the constant fear of flooding, and breathe the stinking Summer effluent and witness road traffic accidents. They ignored photographic evidence of a car covered in floodwater, where an elderly gentleman was rescued from his car, only yards from his home. Despite being told by Cranleigh Councillor Liz Townsend and Farnham’s Jerry Hyman that floodwater was much worse than had been stated and in December 2013 it had reached 45.194m!
They also refused to allow councillors to view further photographic evidence presented by Councillor Jerry Hyman showing both a water mark on the pumping station on the Elmbridge Road, taken in December 2013, as well as flood detritus, proving water had been over a 1 in 1,000 years predicted flood event. Cranleigh has suffered at least five floods of this magnitude in 50 years – 1968, 1981, 1985, 2001 and 2013, so more than 1 in 25 years! Far from the flood zones being increased , due to recent climate change data, they were decreased, and the safety of new residents and people living further downstream should have been paramount. At which point, By-Pass B, did admit he might be worried if it caused problems in Bramley, parochial or what!!
According to the Cranleigh Civic Society: Click here: New residents are not guaranteed flood insurance, in fact they could end up with new (and very expensive) homes that are frankly worthless, but then why would Waverley councillors worry about that, they will either have RETIRED and won’t be there to take the consequences for their dastardly deeds, or hopefully, will be kicked out at the 2018 elections!
So another development dumped on Cranleigh bringing its total new houses up to nearly 1,400. In a race for a housing figure to stop Farnham’s new homes being built. Leaving Craneigh with flooding problems for ever more,
Guess where the children’s play areas is? In the drainage or (SUDS) area, so will not only be completely useless when needed most, but a danger to youngsters. let’s hope new residents keeps a careful eye on their children!
So.. it’s now official – ‘Your Waverley’ is sacrificing the East of the borough on the altar of developers! AND…
Here at the Waverley Web, we often say, nothing further will surprise us, but we had to admit we were shocked by the decision to allow wealthy farmer Peter Hewitt, build, what everyone admitted were, sub-standard homes on an island adjacent to one of the worst areas for flooding, smell and traffic hazards, near a one way bridge the scene of numerous serious accidents.
One councillor described Thakeham’s argument that it builds “quality homes” which would be artificially elevated to keep out the floodwater – would become a housing island, surrounded by water – opposite a stinking Sewage Treatment Works, infested with flies, with homes that fail to meet even Waverley’s own accepted accommodation size standards,
But according to Brian ~Adams the Council’s Portfolio holder for planning, people wanted cheap homes, and whether or not they met acceptable standards, was not a planning consideration.
“Yes, Mr Adams, let’s build another ghetto in Cranleigh like Sirus Place”, said one angry resident after the meeting.
Chairman Peter Isherwood, made a fool of himself yet again, by insulting a council colleague. Yes, you guessed Farnham’s Jerry Hyman because Farnham Residents elected representative dared to contradict evidence put forward by the ‘experts’, and was reminded by the chairman, who has himself become an integral part of Waverley’s shove and shunt brigade to push as much development in the East as possible that HE (JH) was NOT an expert. Despite JH’s dogged determination to challenging the experts ‘misleading evidence’, Isherwood did his usual shut the fu** up exercise, accusing Hyman, of ‘being no expert and refusing to allow him to speak.
Here’s one residents take on the evening, despite the fact that when voting took place the webcast camera was pointed to the wall! Wonder why? Could it be councillors wanted to keep their faces hidden.
Well here they are: Carole Cockburn (stick it all over there in Cranleigh because we don’t want more housing in Farnham), Chairman Peter Isherwood(Handheld) , Maurice Byham – I’ll vote for anything anywhere as long as it isn’t Dunsfold; Mike Band; Michael Goodridge (Wonersh) ; Bryan Adams(Frensham/Tilford) ; Anna James (Chiddingfold); Pat Frost (Farnham), David Else (Elstead); Stephen Hill (Farnham)
It makes my blood boil – I want to know who voted for and who against – Bet I can guess!!! Planners ignore the facts and stick to the NPPF when it suits – I am sick to death of this Planner-Lead Council – as for Isherwood dissing Mr Hyman- there has to be something that can be done – It makes for foul watching and I really feel for the Cranleigh Councilors who are simply not listened to – I hope that when Thakeham try to sell these homes the Buyers know what they are getting……. Boxes for the Affordable and Flooded gardens for everyone – Well done Thakeham. Having reviewed their tactics with the proposed Springbok developement – anything that can be done via Desk Based research or dodgy companies that no longer exist is fine – Shocking and I cannot believe they let this one through – Well done WBC – I hope you will bear the fruits of this decision when it all goes soggy and insurance claims start coming in – Bearing in mind this is all recorded for posterity – I will certainly remind them.
Denise
If you can bear it You can watch the meeting, streamed for two hours before the actual meeting takes place – here:
You have the tone exactly right – a total and utter scandal.
WW do you fancy a little wager? that this one doesn’t get passed next week at the JPC
WA/2017/1050 – LAND AT NORTH END OF TONGHAM ROAD, RUNFOLD
I get the Badgers, and the fact that Guildford are involved – But let us just look objectively how the voting goes – Planners – to give them their due – just wanna say YES – so nothing new there!! then we can see how it goes with the voting this time – Hopefully you will have a Webber on this one!!! It will be baked beans on toast for us I fear
I see GBC refused the planning on this application yesterday do you know if WBC did the same, I missed the web cast last night
Will certainly be watching this one, and no doubt the shove and shunt brigade among the officers will bully everyone into doing their bidding, however, we watch and we wait. I think the betting may be evens on this one.
Over here we are still smarting from that disgraceful decision on the Elmbridge Road. We hear from our followers over in Cranleigh that the place is an absolute mess, businesses are failing, and the For Sale signs are going up all over the place. Shame on those councillors, who just listened to the wrong people.
I will watch with interest – Bet Ms Cockburn & Mr Isherwood don’t let their hands fly quite so quickly Oh look this is FARNHAM… – I know you live there but you get what I am saying – we shall see…….No Doubt they will blame their lack of support on Guildford…………..
Please believe us, Farnham residents have no wish to see the East of the borough desecrated and are bitterly ashamed of some of the unsuitable development, in unsuitable locations being inflicted upon you all. Suffice to say, the residents of the borough of Waverley will make their voices heard at the ballot box. Work on unseating some of the most unscrupulous, dishonourable and totally uncaring councillors should begin at now. The Thakeham Homes decision in Elmbridge Road should be a lesson to everyone in every corner of the borough, because if you can build homes there, you can build them anywhere!
Just watched the JPC. I thought there was a document that all Councillors signed to say they would respect each other. Mrs Frost and Mr Isherwood tore that up, I don’t think I have ever seen such venom directed at another Councillor (Jerry Hyman) before, even Diane was treated better and they were never nice to her. The meeting was a disgrace and the result unbelievable.
Well said!
For the sake of accuracy, I voted AGAINST the recommendation, not for.
Cllr David Else (Elstead)
We apologise – and are making a public apology on a separate post. We fully understand your wish not to be associated with that disgraceful decision.
It appears that if you are a councillor asking the Chair or Joint Chair of the Joint Planning Committee to look at evidence and listen to the public then you will be ridiculed and demeaned. Ishwerwood and Frost are two of the most pompous and ignorant people I have ever come across. Keep plugging away Mr Hyman, over here in the East we don’t expect much help from the Farnham area, but you are at least querying the gung ho planning staff and the Joint Planning Committee desire to concrete everything in the borough twice if possible.
It was Refused – But no surprise there – GBC Refused it so there really wasn’t much else they could do even though they know more SANG is probably going to be needed – Just not there… and they don’t want to lose Good Agricultural Land. Terrible streaming of the Webcast again – I thought it was my Laptop – so watched again on PC and still very poor…. Next week is Ewhurst 58 Homes on Good agricultural land Hmmmmmmm
Thank you for that, Ewhurst will get passed because it is in the East again,we don’t stand a chance here.
I am sure it will – and will they listen to the Ewhurst Parish Council comments – see below:
Ewhurst Parish Council: Comments dated 28/03/2017
The Parish Council objects to the application.
The site is outside the village settlement
boundary and in the Countryside beyond the
Green Belt. Moreover, the Parish Council are
developing their Neighbourhood Plan. Such a
development would have an adverse and
damaging effect on the emerging plan and to
those members of the community working on the
plan. The Parish Council set out the following
concerns:
Density – too many. 63 new homes is over and
above the agreed number of homes proposed for
Ewhurst in the Local Plan over the next 15 years.
Page 17 of 83
Access – access is key to the application. There
is only one way into the proposed development
and that is via The Green, a ‘C’ listed road that
traverses the village North/South: Shere –
Horsham. To achieve access, two large homes
on the Larkfield estate are to be demolished and
much of the soft landscaping will go. The
correlation between the proposed access, the
access for Larkfield a little further south and the
main street is cause for concern.
Highway safety – the proposed access would be
very close to the T junction with The Green, The
Street and Cranleigh Road – a three way,
uncontrolled junction with poor site lines. The
increase in volume of traffic would only add to
these concerns.
Loss of trees and green corridor – this is a
material concern. The loss of trees and the
green corridor along the roadside and beyond
together with the 43 metre visibility splays would
create a significant alien and urban element to
the rural scene.
Open space – impact and effect on neighbouring
properties.
Pond – the Parish Council considers that the
pond would be incapable of dealing with the
runoff and would create problems of flooding out
onto Plough Lane.
Comments dated 18/07/2017 following receipt of
amended plans and description (reduction in
number of dwellings from 63 to 58)
The Parish Council still objects to the application
and all comments previously made still apply.
The amended application in no way addresses
the Parish’s concerns. The harm it would case,
overall impact, scale, and correlation to and with
the natural environment, is unacceptable.
They certainly won’t listen to the parish council they did not listen to Cranleigh last week so they won’t be bothered with ewhurst, the water issue or traffic won’t concern them either, there is this unexplainable ideology with the planning lot, that they have to get as many plans passed as possible regardless of the consequences to the people that live in the near area, absolutely unbelievable and a lot not all of the councillors on the jpc are as bad.