Is the little village of Alfold under siege by developers eager to join it to Dunsfold’s new garden village?
Developers are working in a pincer movement from the north the south, east and west of the two villages on the Surrey/Sussex in a bid to build more homes.
Now villagers are asking – with no development yet appearing at the new Government-backed garden village at Dunsfold – is Alfold destined to become Garden Village Phase 11.
Or ‘ALDUN’ – New Town?
Only the width of a 40ft wide B road separates Alfold village from Dunsfold Garden Village – with consent on the former Dunsfold Aerodrome site for 1,800 homes – and earmarked for a further 500+ in the Local Plan.
Developers have been emboldened by a recent Government Inspector’s decision to allow an appeal by Catesby Strategic Land Ltd for a further 80 homes at the Cala Homes site where 55 homes are currently being built at Sweeters Copse off Loxwood Road.80 more homes on their way to Alfold as a Government Inspector hits ‘Your Waverley’ in its pocket too! The appeal site is located on the edge of Alfold, beyond the currently defined settlement boundary for the village and therefore, in open countryside.
However, the Government’s signal to developers appears to be – if it doesn’t move build on it?
Villagers have until Wednesday to comment on the consultation exercise by Thakeham Homes to build 99 homes on land at Springbok in Loxwood Rd. Fear not, you will have longer to comment on the planning application once lodged. As we post there are no plans on the planning portal. http://thakehamalfold.com/?fbclid=IwAR1wuSjQoLY6t7nWIEJ6SGzABEjQtheDB_eG7wpjbmYvhTc4m6N0jwe1lic https://www.facebook.com/stopalfoldnewtown/
In the same Loxwood Road road – eight new homes are under construction in the Conservation area – adjacent to another construction site of residential units for young disabled adults consented by Surrey County Council, nearby. Alfold gets a new heart – and a safer village?
Developers are now converging on Alfold in their droves – with another 80 homes awaiting determination adjacent to the Esso Service Station with direct access from the A281 Horsham/Guildford Rd at Alfold Crossways. Alfold’s cross, are getting crosser – as the story unfolds on shedloads of new homes on their way to the little village.
In his shock decision on the extension to Sweeters Copse earlier this year, Inspector Michael Boniface also awarded costs against ‘Your Waverley.’ Despite Waverley, Planners claim that Alfold had more than adequately satisfied its share of the 125 homes proposed in Waverley’s Local Plan.
Adding insult to injury he decreed that Waverley did not have, as it had argued – a five-year land supply, and, had been unable to answer basic questions on its approach to calculating its supply. When given an opportunity in a round-table discussion to alter its approach Waverley continued to claim it had a deliverable 5-year supply only to change its position a day later that it could only demonstrate a four-year supply! Its volte-face will now cost the taxpayer tens of thousands of pounds.
The Inspector found the council to have acted unreasonably for wasting the applicants time and money, so awarded the developers’ costs against it.
Now for the second time in two years – following a 2018 public inquiry – dismissed by an Inspector villagers face yet another stab at development by Thakeham Homes on land, also in Loxwood Road formerly owned by Care Ashore – The Seamans’ Charity at Springbok. It wants to build 99 homes in a village with little or no infrastructure. No school – little or no public transport; a village and garage shop – and no GP practice. The village regularly floods with water and sewerage, has no gas, and poor water supply. A new access on Loxwood Road would be provided by demolishing an existing bungalow owned by – yes, you guessed – Thakeham Homes! NO PLANS HAVE YET BEEN LODGED.
It is believed the Seamans’charity may now have sold-out to ‘the – have another go brigade’ -Thakeham Homes. But this time for a smaller scheme – being dubbed – ‘the thin end of the wedge’ en-route to the future development of the huge Seamans’ Union land-holding at Springbok in the future.
If the new proposed sites are given planning approval its will result in the eastern part of Waverley contributing to well over 50% of all the development proposed in the borough!
Public Inquiry decision on Care Ashore and Thakeham Homes’ boat sunk by a Government Inspector!
Appeal Decision 3237359 on Sweeters Copse
Here is the Sweeters Copse information.https://www.catesbyestates.co.uk/land/sweeters-reach,-off-loxwood-road-&-chilton-close-alfold?r=1
Nice map, but of course the 99 Springbok homes would not be where they’re shown, but pushed up against the existing houses on Loxwood Road. https://www.facebook.com/stopalfoldnewtown/
Thank you for informing us Mr Clarke – we will ensure we tweak our map and move the 99 Springbok Homes slightly further into Loxwood Road.
Can’t help wondering why 99? Does it sound better than 100 for the locals?
Until WBC can prove that they can meet their Local Plan commitments for the WHOLE of the Borough – the East will continue to be bombarded by Developers as we are seen as an easy target due to the lack of any Green Belt or AONB.
Perhaps that is part of the “plan” It is not rocket science is it? The East of the Borough has the smallest Population therefore the lowest Voting numbers. It was obvious this was the case when the Survey regarding The Dunsfold Park Development was done when the vast majority of the Borough voted FOR the Application as it meant they would not have to bear the brunt of the new Developments. This seemed to also be the case when the many applications for Cranleigh were approved over the last 6-7 years
The fact that our Infrastructure is so poor here does not seem to matter to the Inspectorate when Planning Applications go to Appeal as noted in the National Audit Office’s 2019 “Planning for new Homes” paper…….
______________________________________________________________________
Identifying a local supply of land for new homes
1.12 The Department requires that local authorities identify a local supply of land
for development for the next five years. If local authorities fail to identify a supply of
land, then the “presumption of sustainable development” applies. This presumption
obliges local authorities to approve applications for developments, unless the “adverse
impacts demonstrably outweigh the benefits”. If the presumption is applied, this can
give developers greater freedoms on where to build new homes and the local authority
has less control. It can also lead to costly appeals by developers of local authorities’
decisions on planning applications. The Planning Inspectorate considers that many
appeals are based on a lack of a five-year supply of land but does not have data to
determine the extent of this.
1.13 While the Department mandates that local authorities must identify a supply of
land, it does not enforce this directly. Instead, it relies on local authorities’ desire to avoid
the presumption of sustainable development. This approach may prove an effective
mechanism locally. One local authority told us that it had experienced high numbers of
costly appeals against its planning decisions by developers who claimed that it had not
identified a five-year supply of land…..
_______________________________________________________________________
So unless WBC can pull their finger out… I very much fear that when this application is lodged, even if the whole Village voted against it and the JPC reject it, the Inspectorate will Grant on Appeal
Boris has promised New homes – and he doesn’t care where they are and Thakeham know that – as do all the others!
How very sad, and as another valued part of the countryside faces obliteration by bricks and concrete – how consistent with the Government, county and borough’s declared climate emergency legislation!
No doubt you good people of Alfold can expect an outpouring of anger and action from The Protect Our Waverley Group – which has, so far have, been silent on anything and everything other than Dunsfold Aerodrome. Perhaps if had not stood in the way of the airfield brownfield site for so many years, Alfold would not now be faced with all these unwanted, unsuitable and unsustainable developments.
Will these developers be asked for CIL monies to provide Alfold with a new school and all the other amenities it lacks?
As for Boris – and his shovel-ready sites, he says dig and developers ask – how deep and how high. As for Robert Jenrick, no doubt all the developers will have been lining the Tory Toffers coffers, just as they have been doing for years.