Will the sale of Dunsfold Park open the door to unwanted development right across Waverley?

Featured

This Annual Record from The Trinity College featured below gave us a good laugh here at the Waverley Web.

Here’s John Ward the Leader of “Your Waverley’ making his shock announcement and our post yesterday: TRINITY COLLEGE TAKES FLIGHT FROM DUNSFOLD!

Then we have this in the Farnham Herald which highlights the threat to Farnham and all the other towns and villages in Waverley. Both Farnham and the eastern villages in and around  Cranleigh are particularly vulnerable.

 

https://www.farnhamherald.com/article.cfm?

id=140592&headline=Dunsfold%20Park%20to%20be%20sold%20again%20%E2%80%93%20opening%20door%20to%20unwanted%20development%20in%20Waverley&sectionIs=&searchyear=2021&cat=Planning

TRINITY COLLEGE TAKES FLIGHT FROM DUNSFOLD!

Featured

Waverley Councillors were left reeling last night when it was announced at a meeting of the full Council that Dunsfold Aerodrome Limited is to have “changes in its ownership.”

In other words following the appointment of a new Senior Bursar at Trinity College, Cambridge (the owners of Dunsfold Park) the College has decided to cut and run from its commitment to create a new village at the former aerodrome.

 

 

 Our graphic shows Dunsfold Aerodrome’s industrial links in its past. Who was it who wanted to see Dunsfold as one big industrial park? Former MP Anne Milton and perhaps …? 

This spells –  ‘Chinese Government.’

The new Bursar, Richard Turnill – fresh from BlackRock, where he was the Global Chief Investment Strategist – is now responsible for the College’s endowment fund that, according to its blurb, provides 75% of its operating income.

It would seem that Mr Turnill, unlike his illustrious predecessors, doesn’t favour taking the long view, which is what those who invest in property are generally required to do.  Being a city man, he prefers to play the financial markets instead.  

Maybe, before it’s too late, but should we send Mr Turnill a little light bedtime reading by way of a copy of Jeffrey Archer’s latest novel (Turn a Blind Eye), which our Webbers have been reading – in which it’s somewhat  presciently noted that:

‘The land that surrounds Felixstowe Docks is owned by Trinity College, Cambridge, and is one of its most valuable assets.  The college bursar at the time, a Mr Tressilian Nicholas, purchased the 3,800-acre site on behalf of the college in 1933, along with a road that led to the then-derelict docks.  His successor, a Mr Bradfield, spotted its potential, and it’s now the largest port in Britain and makes the college a small fortune.’

Lord Butler, a former cabinet minister, and master of Trinity asked Bradfield at a finance meeting if he realised that the college-owned a tin mine in Cornwall that hadn’t shown a return since 1546, to which the bursar famously replied,

“You’ll find, master, that in this college, we take the long view.”

It would seem that in declining to take the long view at Dunsfold Park, Mr Turnill is turning his back not only on centuries-old tradition at Trinity College but on the residents of Waverley and their councillors, who were relying on Trinity to deliver on its promise to create an exemplar new eco-village at the former aerodrome, and thus, in one fell swoop, alleviating Waverley Borough Council’s housing shortfall and rejuvenating the former airfield which is home to many local businesses and jobs, which have done well to survive the current Corona Virus pandemic.

Read yesterday’s post:   Are the floodgates for further development in the eastern villages about to open?

The Waverley Web revealed “the change of ownership” last week here:

Is it Farnham’s fault that homes are being dumped on the east of Waverley?

Waverley’s housing delivery supply is heavily dependent on Dunsfold’s garden village.

Without Dunsfold Park’s contribution to its housing numbers, Waverley falls way short of its housing supply, leaving the door wide open to every cowboy developer roaming the green fields of its fair Borough. 

Following the bombshell news, Waverley’s councillors and planners alike are feeling abused, bruised and used by the actions of Mr Turnhill. Not that they mentioned him, but we have been doing a bit of our own espionage work around the Dunsfold delay with a few of our Cambridge informants.  

Our spider’s 8 highly efficient pedipalps reach far and wide but it is their other two peds they use as hands that do all the work!

Oh what a tangled web they weave?

And what of The Flying Scot, Jim McAllister, who has spent the past 19 years trying to bring his grandiose plans for an exemplar eco-village to fruition?  

In Trinity College, Cambridge, with its illustrious history, deep pockets and famous ‘long view’, McAllister no doubt thought he’d found the perfect partner to embrace and deliver on his vision but, unfortunately, it now appears he backed the wrong horse, not realising it would throw the jockeys mid-race!

That’s the problem with horses – you need a big shovel to clear up the TURDHILLS they leave in their wake!

Here’s what’s at risk. – This masterplan here? 

And now the speculation can begin?   Who has the deepest pockets and who else gets the blame for scuppering the Dunsfold game? Answers on a postcard to us here at contact@waverleyweb.org

We will post a clip of the Leader’s official statement tomorrow. Hopefully, with a few reactions?

A Cranleigh development dubbed as “awful & objectionable” has been approved.

Featured

The Cranleigh development of a former lettuce nursery dubbed as one of the worst designs Waverley councillors had ever seen forced the developers back to the drawing board. Now, following improvements, it now has now been given planning consent.

Voting: 7 votes in Favour – 6 Against and Two Abstentions.

Planning Consultant Patrick Arthurs admitted that the previous design was… “a bit brutal.” Adding … “Although the local ward members still don’t like it, they admit it is better, with a softer appearance.”

So that’s alright then – something going up that Cranleigh can be proud of?

However, the three-phase development known as the Knowle Park Initiative will still include three-storey apartment blocks!

Two of which will be considerably higher than an adjacent business building called Europa House owned by Whitesales.   

In 2017 Waverley Planners gave consent for 265 homes to be built.

One site off Alfold Road in Knowle Park – for 74 dwellings with an emergency access road (WA2016/2207) was to have included affordable homes. These were pulled out and all the affordable homes put into the 118 home second phase scheme by A2 Dominion on the other side of the Alfold Road.  A third phase will be completed by 2026 – exactly 10 years since the application was lodged.

A Cranleigh development dubbed as ‘ awful and objectionable’ has been thrown out by Waverley planners. 

Top picture – what the apartment block might have looked like… and below what it will look like!  The apartment block is described as 2.5 storeys and as you will see it is actually a three-storey block.

So whose kidding who?

Here below are examples of Cranleigh properties which is what the eastern area planning committee was told by ‘Consultant Planning Officer’ Patrick Arthurs that the latest re-design was based upon. 

As you will no doubt see – the new builds in Alfold Road, have a striking resemblance to the properties featured below?

Cllr Martin D’Arcy – said he was “very disappointed” with the new design which had the same Stalinist approach as before and the developer’s de-minimus approach to the re-design in 2021 would be getting no vote or kudos from him.

Officer Arthurs said: “The development met current guidelines and developers could not be asked to do more.”

A Government Commission says councils ‘ should shame developers of the worst housing plans.’

Alfold’s Cllr Kevin Deanus said the state of Alfold Road was atrocious and the chicane of a Give Way at Elmbridge Road was downright dangerous. “There are already fisticuffs down there on Elm bridge and it just gets worse and worse.”


Is it Farnham’s fault that homes are being dumped on the east of Waverley?

Featured

Waverley

Will  another Neighbourhood Plan hit Waverley’s wheelie bin?

It’s official Your Waverley has no five – year housing supply.
Planning officer Beth Howland  told the Eastern Area Planning Committee this week that at a recent Farham Public Inquiry the council had been forced to concede that it did not have a 5.3-year housing supply – but had 4.99 -years.
Clip Here:
Pretty crucial information for a Government Inspector to chew over during an appeal hearing against the council’s refusal of 140 homes at Weybourne Lane, in Badshot Lea?
As we here at the Waverley Web said in this recent post, if the  Inspector allows Bewley Homes to develop land in Badshot Lea it will send an Exocet missile through Farnham’s Neighbourhood Plan and could herald open season for other developers to build in Farnham and elsewhere. Particularly in the eastern villages of Alfold and Cranleigh in particular.
Yesterday we received this comment from Alfold resident Denise Wordsworth – someone who keeps a close eye on Waverley’s Planning ball.

So long as the vast majority of Waverley Residents live in Farnham 32%, Godalming 18% and Haslemere 14% Compared to Cranleigh at 9% it was always inevitable that Dunsfold Park would end up being largest Egg in the Local Plan Basket and we all know the saying about putting all your Eggs in one basket!

Developers insist Waverley cannot meet their 5 Year Housing Plan and it appears from last night’s Eastern Planning meeting that we no longer have 5.3 years but 4.99 years… and so these developers, who think we have about a 3.5 Year plan, will carry on trying to load more and more Housing in the Eastern villages due to the lack of Greenbelt, AONB, SANGS, SPAs and all the other protections that are afforded across the rest of the Borough.

Countryside Beyond the Greenbelt means little to the Inspectors, and the fact that this particular site was only Partially PDL – was also not considered to be important.

There are no Sustainable methods of Transport here.. and you can stick Travel Plans in and talk about Car sharing and the Hourly Bus service (HELLO??) until the cows come home (if there are any left) 78 Homes will generate at least 140 new journeys AM & PM daily onto the A281. The Garden centre did NOT and was used mainly on weekends and afternoons, as no-one went there during the rush hours.

New residents will be highly reliant on cars to get to shops, schools, medical centres etc and they will travel to Cranleigh (if they can get in) Guildford and Horsham, putting more strain on the A281.

 

Building on the ‘Green Belt’ Ok for some in “Your Waverley?’

Featured

No stranger to supporting development in the Green Belt  Bramley Councillor – All- at – Seabourne – popped up again recently at a Waverley Planning Meeting to do it again!

Despite being at odds with the expert planning officers’ recommendation to refuse a house being built on the green belt (AGLV & AONB) in Hascombe – All-At-Sea – led the charge to overturn their advice.  Claiming a bit of the old flour mill wheel and a bit of wall on the site was enough to drive a coach and horses through planning rules! 

(Planning Application No WA/2021/0016).

All-At Sea` called the planning application into the committee for determination because he, and others – believed the development should be allowed. Officers had wanted to refuse it on policy grounds – under their delegated powers. They claimed it was against planning policy, was outside the settlement of Hascombe and would impact GB and AGLV/ AONB.

Cranleigh Councillor Liz Townsend didn’t believe that the remains of a flour mill wheel  (a non designated heritage asset), was sufficient grounds to develop the land, and was very concerned about setting a precedent.
“This is in the Green Belt – outside the village settlement  – and I am very concerned about allowing this.”
She argued there were no “special circumstances” at least not any that could not be used not to accept similar development elsewhere. “We are going down a very slippery slope here, this development does not stack up on planning grounds.”

Here’s where it is.

Here’s what remains

The Application was AGREED BY 11 VOTES TO 3 WITH ONE ABSTENTION. So,  All-at-Sea’s call-in was another success story. The same councillor who, a few years ago, voted to SUPPORT the building of SIX HOUSES on GREEN BELT land in Park Drive, Bramley (Planning Application Nos WA/2016/2405 & WA/2017/1169). 

It would seem this is yet another case of cronyism in high places for, together with his former Ward-mate, By-pass Byham (AKA former Councillor Maurice Byham), Councillor All-at-Sea threw a life-jacket and belt to his Tory crony, former MP for Epsom & Ewell, Archie Hamilton, (who was made a life peer, in 2005, when he became Baron Hamilton of Epsom).  Just goes to show the Tory Tossers stick together when it comes to planning matters.

At the time he declared an interest – and then waded in to support the scheme on Bramley’s Green Belt.

He went along with the applicants who said they were, “extremely passionate about renovating the Mill (that isn’t there and according to heritage records has never been mentioned) because it is “part of village history.” 

Developers wanting to build in the Green Belt: ‘Form an orderly queue!’

 

As one villager said – ‘how many more bloody houses are they going to dump on Alfold?

Featured

Yet another planning application has been submitted for the former Wyevale Garden Centre in Alfold – and just like Topsy – it has “just growed and growed.”
Developers Alfold Real Estates which already has permission for 56 homes tucked into its back pocket now wants to up the ante to 78!

And neither can the Royal Surrey Hospital! It comments in its letter to Waverley Planners.

“The Trust’s utilisation of acute bed capacity is at 95% which significantly exceeds the optimal 85% occupancy rate. This demonstrates that current occupancy levels are highly unsatisfactory, and the problem will be compounded by an increase in need created by the development which does not coincide with an increase in the number of bed spaces available at the Hospital. This is the inevitable result where clinical facilities are forced to operate at overcapacity. Any new residential development will add a further strain on the current acute healthcare system.”

It wants £160,000 if the development goes ahead towards providing healthcare.

Dear God, how many more bloody houses are they going to try and squeeze into a village that has no amenities?
Denise Wordsworth  says: 
Once again we have a developer trying to increase the number of Housing for this small Village with limited facilities or infrastructure. A village that has met its housing obligation of a min 125 Homes and in fact far exceeded it!
It is simply not good enough to expect a Tier 3 Village to take on this volume of housing. There has been NO PUBLIC consultation on this – minimal for the previous application limited to a few local (Or not so local as we live closer and had none) neighbours, and the APC. They are basing this yet again on the fact that WBC MAY OR MAY NOT have its  5 year husing supply. – But that does not mean that housing should be DUMPED here in one of the smaller Villages.
Planning has to be appropriate to the location with it’s needs and resources and this simply isn’t. The fact that the Inspector granted the original application for 56 Homes and took no consideration of the other appeal applications – just shows the system is flawed.  Reliance on the Dunsfold Park Application is NOT RELEVANT – It has not gone to Reserved Matters and should therefore not be considered and until it does.. this is flagrant Piggy-Backing off a development under review in Planning terms.
I have no doubt that if this is refused they will re-apply for the 88 homes they also put into the mix. This is simply wrong and puts all smaller applications in jeopardy – which are the sort of applications the village can deal with. I will resubmit my original opposition under separate cover. But For now, I simply OBJECT
The application reference is WA/2021/0462.
The deadline for comments is 16 April 2021. But you can keep sending them in.

 

 

 

Latest update on road closures in Waverley & Guildford.

Featured

Surrey County Council

Is this the new dangerous sport coming soon for Surrey’s pot-hole filled roads?

Here are the latest updates for Waverley and Guildford – road closures and traffic lights.
Click on these links to avoid the road closures and traffic lights – if you can!

Following Follows and Rivers on their journey to Surrey County Council.

Featured

Here at the Waverley Web, we have been an admirer of Paul Follows since he first arrived on the scene at Waverley Towers. And the answer is NO – if you believe it is because he is a Liberal Democrat. the truth is far simpler.

It is because he tells it as it is, warts and all.

He communicates directly with the public. Not through a laboriously long-winded and slow communications machine – where the language is couched in ‘council speak’ and where misuse of words blunts the edge of the message. 

Paul Follows is not on a “direction of travel’ or ‘engaged in a piece of work.’ He is making a plan and doing the job – and telling everyone in the process – including the Waverley Web.  The same Waverley Web that is loathed by the Conservative Group who believed in doing things behind our backs – making decisions in Group Meetings – which we understand is still in Committee Room 1 – a domain normally reserved for the ruling group, not the largest group? The same group that failed consistently to deliver a robust Local Plan, and which for years ignored the largest brownfield site in the borough! Which has now dumped us in a developers hole!

On 6 May the party’s stranglehold at Surrey could end, as it has in Waverley and other councils across the county. Tories currently hold 61 of the 81 seats.

That the dream team the Lib Dems have come up with will make a massive difference at County Towers – we are in no doubt. Particularly when Cllr Mark Merryweather joins the county fray. We Bet Fred, or anyone else, that once in the hot seat ‘MM’ will be trawling through Surrey’s accounts and going through them with a fine-tooth comb. He might not only discover WHY Surrey wants to take over the 11 boroughs & district councils but actually tell us what fine mess it is really in?

 

Here’s his message from a brave man who made it before the hairdressers opened

 

Does Surrey County Council wish “Your Waverley’ was responsible for the roads?

 Surrey can’t spell Waverley! It’s official.

When you spend a great deal of time trying to let residents know the difference between what Waverley Borough Council does and what Surrey County Council does…and then you get this sign-in in Farnham is it any surprise that we want to bring about change in the May elections?

Or perhaps Surrey’s head honchos who a while back wanted to create a unitary authority for the county decided that perhaps if Waverly and other borough councils actually had the responsibility for caring for our pot-holed roads it knew of someone who could do it better? 
No doubt the Waverly County Council in Wisconsin, West Virginia? Or perhaps Waverly Council in South Dakota – or better still how about Waverly in Nebraska! 
Or step forward to the country where they know all about road building – Waverly Gauteng in South Africa?
Perhaps this Cranleigh & Ewhurst County Councillor is responsible for the Spelling Bees at County Towers? Because this is his official title on his web page!
For all the confused souls in our town – the road network is the responsibility of Surrey and not Waverley! But to say Surrey manages our road is a bit of an exaggeration!