The borough’s villages – particularly Milford with its train station – have just lost their vital Green Belt protection.
The Waverley Web considers this issue to be critical…
Our sources tell us that elsewhere on Facebook, one local planning geek suggests that the Government’s new “Grey Belt” policy, combined with Waverley’s lack of a 5-year housing supply figures, may have removed Milford’s existing Green Belt protection at a stroke…
So, see Planoraks at the latest and note the clarification on towns/villages at 4.
https://www.planoraks.com/posts-1/the-grey-belt-has-arrived
but particularly these headings
How should the contribution land makes to the relevant Green Belt purposes be assessed?
When making judgements as to whether land is a grey belt, authorities should consider the contribution that assessment areas make to Green Belt purposes a, b, and d. Considerations for informing these judgements are set out below:
Purpose A – to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas
This purpose relates to the sprawl of large built-up areas. Villages should not be considered large built-up areas
Purpose A – to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas
Purpose B – to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another
This purpose relates to the merging of towns, not villages. ………..etc
(Note: There isn’t a Purpose C that WW can see.)
Purpose D – to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns
This purpose relates to historic towns, not villages. Where no historic towns are in the plan area, it may not be necessary to provide detailed assessments against this purpose.
WW Do you get it?
Yet again you write that Jeremy Hunt delayed the Dunsfold Park development. HE DID NOT and I’ve told you that before. After he moved to his current home he took no part in the POW opposition to the the development when it went to appeal and approval. At his present home he will be affected hugely by the traffic etc from a large development of housing at Dunsfold Park. No wonder he might have said that he feared the development ever going ahead. So do almost everyone living.
Ask the owners why the development is being delayed.
Waverley BC should not have relied so much on the Dunsfold Park development in its 5 year housing plan. It was always going to be a difficult development with infrastructure and contamination problems to be overcome.
Webbing Spiders don’t usually tell porkies but you have again. I know that you supported the Lib Dems who surely don’t want to be associated with telling untruths.
He told a member of the public on the train to London that he DID NOT support the development of Dundfold airfield. he said it in public meetings. Let him stand up publicly and say he did not object, and then we will retract our claim and apologise. And for your information, he doesn’t always know who he speaks to when he is out and about. There are spiders everywhere. Could you look in the corners of your home?
As for nobody wanting development in Dunsfold Park, that is nonsense! They are begging for Dunsfold to happen in Alfold, Dunsfold Village, Ewhurst, Cranleigh and most certainly here in Farnham and Godalming. Because otherwise, it ends up in the countryside all around them. Whether we like it or not, Dunsfold airfield remains the largest brownfield site in the borough and most other boroughs that will soon take over local government.
You know what? It is even possible in Hascombe near you!
What about before he moved to his current home? He was certainly instrumental in delaying it then.
https://www.farnhamherald.com/news/planning/dunsfold-homes-scheme-called-in-181777
Jeremy Hunt has always opposed development at Dunsfold airfield. Still, he doesn’t want the electoral fodder to know where he stands because they have all realised that all their green fields are going under concrete, while the largest brownfield site in the borough of Waverley remains a film set when required.
Watch this space. He is already cosying up to Dunsfold because he is beginning to realise he made a wrong move. The moral of the story is: Be careful what you wish for.
I think that he may have opposed the Dunsfold Park development in early days ie 10 plus years ago. He took no part in supporting the POW lead in objecting to the development.
And the Farnham Herald article of 2018 does not state that he opposed or delayed the development. Savid Javid approved the development when it was called in to the Minister so any chat by Jeremy Hunt to him did not delay it.
I am prepared to accept that he played no part in the Dunsfold issue once he had moved into the locality because he had a clear conflict of interest. It probably also got politically more difficult for him to oppose publicly once it became the Conservative administration at Waverley supporting Dunsfold via the local plan. However, the call in delayed it and the call in was something he supported and played a part in. So he delayed it.
What nonsense! Of course, it was delayed and cost \Waverley Council’s ratepayers and the owners a small fortune. You, as developer, should understand how much high court actions cost and how long they take!
Of course, he has never been open about his opposition; it has all been behind the scenes.
Delay was and is being caused by the owners and potential developers. They should be asked for the reasons for the delay in building the houses. It’s a long time since Sajid Javid gave the go ahead.
Who cares? I was opposed to the DP Park Development despite the fact they were at least forking out shed loads of Dosh for Infrastructure Projects – There was little they could do with regards to the Roads other than put more Buses on with some minor amendments to various Junctions.
But WBC put all their Eggs in One Basket and failed to realise that other developers in the East of the Borough were Piggy-Backing on it to say there was no further requirement for them to provide any Major Infrastructure improvements other than s106 and Cil Funds as it would all be happening at DP!
At least now there is a reality Check and the fact is there are other parts of the Borough who are “Hiding” under their Big GREENBELT Blanket and hoping nobody will peek under the covers and discover the amount of Brownfield they DO HAVE and how much of their Precious Greenbelt is GREYBELT
I don’t wish ill on any of the residents of Waverley – But there has been a distinct lack of ANY support for the Eastern Villages or Cranleigh. Maybe it is about time they all stepped up to the plate and realised what goes on here in the East – Will impact All of them in the end.
We will run out of Transport, Water, Sewage Disposal, Health & Schools, Utilities – We will all have to drive to get to anything here.
If there is anyone in Waverley that can put their hand on their Heart and say that what is going on in our Village in Alfold is OK – with over 490 Developments Approved (most via Appeal) – Including 199 Social/Affordable homes and another 400 on the cards from Thakeham and 80 More Scoping at Bridian Farm nearby, then I would very much like to hear why.
Denise (Grumpy ONLY of Alfold)
Well, I care and I also prefer accuracy.
So while I’m on, IMO there isn’t masses of brownfield and what there is and particularly the big sites generally get built out pretty fast once they become available and there are multiple examples in Godalming. Catteshall Lane, Kennedy and Donkin, areas around the station.
As for Alfold, no what has happened isn’t right or fair but it was predictable given the push for numbers and your lack of protection.
Grey Belt will be a game changer and that is also my prediction, but this is not to be confused with support on my part. I don’t like the appearance of new housing estates where previously there was open space but it is necessary and inevitable and we need to prepare for it.
Good old Jeremy Hunt told the people of Alfold at a public meeting that Waverley, not Government Inspectors, had allowed all the development. Just another pack of lies!
Aaaahh I’m tired of the Waverley web making. No lies please. We all know that Waverley supported and approved the development and that the objectors were defeated by the Minister Sajid David saying that he agreed with Waverley and the proposers.
The damage was done, aided by the Pandemic.