Right in the middle of a Surrey County Council election period and what do the Highway Honchos decide to do? – shut almost all the roads in and out of Cranleigh.
Asked a question on Facebook.
Am I right in thinking that we now have Run Common Rd, Knowle Lane, A281 from Elm bridge to Whipley Manor, Horsham Rd and Smithwood Common Rd all closed at night currently (and a lot of them through the day too!)?
Are there any other options for getting to Guildford other than over Winterfold (but inevitably travelling at the same speed as you would if you were cycling.) Or Shamley Green? Getting to and from work (late shifts in Guildford) is proving challenging to say the least!
Andrew Wood said:
Yep, it’s ridiculous, getting into and out of Cranleigh is turning into a kind of real-life board game where you have to throw a double six to start. I wonder what our local Councillors have to say on the subject given there are local elections coming up?
Perhaps Surrey County Councillor Andrew (My little Povey) can come up with the answer for the good people of Cranleigh? Or for any other unsuspecting motorists eager to get there?
We have also heard from our WW followers that the Diversion signing is dreadful too.
Drive off the A281 and drive along Wildwood Lane and into Knowle Lane and then it tells you the Road Is Closed! Then schlep all the way back to the A281 and find another route – perhaps down the Alfold Road and then find yourself at a standstill as you meet one great big building site, and then… wait for it… find it impossible to get into the Elmbridge Road!
Let’s all vote for some sane transport planning at SCC highways – from the new Surrey County Councillors eh?
Here’s one suggestion in the picture below for making it out of the eastern village posted up by a villager.
As developers fall over one another in a pincer movement to turn little old Alfold into a new town “Your Waverley ‘ finally – issues a STOP NOTICE on the works at the Wildwood Golf Club.
Despite the parish, borough, county councils and the MP being bombarded with complaints from villagers – including Alfold’s very own Mole, the new owners of the club on the A281 at Alfold Crossways – just ‘Carry On Regardless!’
Despite a Temporary Stop Notice being issued by Waverley Enforcement Last Wednesday – the Diggers are still on-site and merrily Dig – dig – digging away.
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR ALFOLD?
At first, villagers were ecstatic because they believed they were going to get the Professional Golf Association (PGA) HQ, a 27-hole golf course, a hotel with a spar for the locals and 39 golf lodges as part of a planning consent given ten years ago. Now they are not quite so sure? As the land being cleared – has nothing to do with the extant permission for the golf development it is closer to THE NUTSHELL – a site which is now either owned or on which the developers have an option, for yes – you guessed folks – MORE HOUSING
Now the new owner’s flash Jag has swung into Alfold with some big VERY BIG plans. – Sedat Peker is a very interesting individual. Full of Eastern promise as part of Peker Holdings Ltd. based in Cobham – and recently quoted as saying: Do read his Wikipedia profile, we have provided a link.
AH! HA! So there we have it, folks! This is all about A NEW SELF-SUSTAINING NEW SETTLEMENT – IS IT?
Or as an Alfold Mole would say:
“A 9 Hole Golf course!!! Looks like the Nutshell are in on this and will sell their Brownfield land for housing along with the 9 hole/Car parks etc and we will have an application for hundreds of new Homes. They can then carve up the rest of the Farmland for sale and we will have lost this wonderful asset – one of the few we had in this village.”
This Wikipedia profile makes very interesting reading. If any of our followers have ever wondered why the Waverley Web remains anonymous – then here’s your answer!!
But no worries. According to Turkish businesswoman Mrs Aysegul Peker, there will be plenty of goodies for the locals in the NEW BIG WILDWOOD URBAN SETTLEMENT bag. Because she intends to donate some of the 230 acres back to the community, so will consult residents to find out what they would like to see that land used for.
A spokesman for Mrs Peker said: “She wants to give back some of the lands for a school, community centre, playground or something that the residents here currently need.
Now! Where have the locals in Alfold heard that one before?
“Whether that be 10, 20 or 30 acres. Whatever the residents want she will try to deliver,” she says.
Groundwork construction on the hotel has already begun on the site.
Surrey County Council was due to issue a Temporary Closure notice on the Footpath to yesterday THURSDAY. However, walkers tell us it is not yet in force. Once granted the well-trodden path by villagers will be across Pickenswood Copse a site covered by restrictions as an (ASNW and Tree Preservation Order site)
‘No community wants this’: Sussex new town plans anger local Tories
Although the Waverley Web mainly concentrates on all things Waverley/Surrey – the county is not an island and development on Waverley’s borders – e.g. Bordon – affects all our lives here in Farnham.
This scheme in Adversane adjoins the Surrey/Sussex border near Loxwood and Dunsfold and would mainly access the A281 Guildford to Horsham Road.
The scheme named Kingswood for nearly 3,000 new homes assembled by Sir Michael Hintze, who has given £4.6m to the Conservatives is a hop, skip and a jump from Dunsfold’s new garden village (2,600) homes on the former airfield on the outskirts of Cranleigh
Plans for a new town in rural Sussex backed by one of the Conservative party’s biggest donors and close allies of Prince Charles are exposing a split in the Tory party over how to rapidly accelerate housebuilding.
The scheme for 2,850 homes, is being proposed on open fields at Adversane which has been assembled by hedge fund billionaire Sir Michael Hintze who has given £4.6m to the Conservatives. Its design is partly inspired by Poundbury, the ersatz Georgian town in Dorset created by Prince Charles, and Sir Michael Peat, the Prince of Wales’s former private secretary is a director of the development company.
But it is being opposed by local Conservative MP Andrew Griffith, who said:
“it is the wrong type of development in the wrong place” and local Tory councillors who have warned: “No community wants this on their doorstep.”
It looks set to be a test case for the government’s controversial new planning strategy announced last month which is set to relax national planning rules and set significantly higher local housebuilding targets in areas including Horsham.
John Halsall, the Tory leader of Wokingham borough council in Berkshire, which is also facing central government demands to build significantly more homes warned of a high political cost saying
“You won’t have a Tory left in the south or south-east of England.”
Some of the land is owned by Eton College, the alma mater of the prime minister, Boris Johnson. The largest parcel which would be built over is a farm purchased by Hintze for £10m from Mike Stock, the songwriter behind a string of 1980s hits by Kylie Minogue, Rick Astley and Bananarama.
Local opponents say the project – which could ultimately create a town of around 10,000 people – threatens rare wildlife, an increase in car congestion and risks becoming a dormitory for London commuters.
“There is an enormous amount of antipathy to this scheme,” said Julian Trumper, a local resident organising opposition. “Horsham has already taken enough of Sussex’s requirement to build housing and this potential growth is unsustainable. Infrastructure and road and rail links are insufficient. The displacement to wildlife and established ecosystems by building a new town in the open countryside is incalculable.”
The project claims that it will: “focus on building a community for people of all ages and providing a platform for economic opportunity and sustainable growth” and will champion the principle of “beauty” in town planning identified by Sir Roger Scruton in his report to the government on planning and architecture.
But the row over whether it should go ahead exposes a growing schism in Conservative ranks over two proposed reforms to accelerate housebuilding.
The first is a new planning system that will make it easier and quicker for developers to build on greenfield sites, which Conservative councillors have complained undermines local democratic involvement by proposing zones where detailed planning consents would not berequired.
The second is new inflated house building targets which backbench Conservative MPs and council leaders have criticised as too high and ignoring local needs. The new target for Horsham would see the area required to deliver 1,715 new homes a year, more than double the current target of 800.
The high status of Kingswood’s backers – with close links to the top of government and the monarchy – has also sparked fears that local influence could be further undermined, with opponents citing the planning scandal earlier this year in which it emerged that the housing secretary, Robert Jenrick, backed a project by party donor Richard Desmond against the advice of officials.
In other words, it is not what you know but who you know in the wonderful world of developers?
“After what we saw with Jenrick and Desmond, we have the impression that the property developers are doing all this with barely any local democracy at all.
A spokesperson for Horsham district council said:
“Any site that is allocated in the next step of the local plan process will be subject to full public scrutiny at a public examination conducted by an independent planning inspector. Each site will be assessed to determine whether it is suitable, achievable and available, in a public arena.”
The local Conservative MP, Andrew Griffith, said: “We are building on greenfield, we’re not using brownfield land. This is the wrong type of development in the wrong place. The identity of the landowner is not important. I am giving voice to constituent concerns.”He told a Commons debate earlier this month: “So many of my constituents in villages of every letter of the alphabet, are having their lives blighted by the prospect of inappropriate and unsustainable development”.
Philip Circus, a Conservative member of Horsham council in whose ward the development is proposed, added:
“I am not interested that people are connected with royalty or people that donate to the Conservative party. It cuts no ice with me. We don’t feel any compulsion to doff our caps to anyone other than the residents. This is a rural community which in infrastructure terms does not look like an area for major housing development.”
The Kingswood masterplan has been submitted for inclusion in Horsham district council’s local plan, which is currently out to public consultation. The director of the development company, Dominic Richards, was formerly a director at the Prince’s Foundation for Building Community – the heir to the throne’s architecture and planning charity which promotes traditional urbanism.
Couldthis be the reason Surrey County Council highway chiefs finally supported the development at Dunsfold Park – after opposing it for donkey’s years?
According to a report by a transport pressure group called Transport For New Homes, after looking closely at 20 Garden Community proposals it became clear that councils were using the concept to fund road infrastructure.
No surprise there then?
The group has been studying master-plans – including those for Dunsfold Park – the former aerodrome soon to be home to1,800 homes in its first phase and heaven knows how many more after that.
Waverley’s Local Plan earmarks 2,600 homes on the aerodrome, but if the current Tory Government, headed by Bulldozer Boris and Bob the Builder ‘Jenrick’ have their way, there could be many, many more. After all, it is the largest brownfield site in the borough of Waverley, seen as ideal sites for development by the Government. It is no secret that Guildford and Woking councils would love to welcome the inclusion of Dunsfold in their patch.
Maybe if a re-organisation of local government gets the go-ahead – that may yet happen?
In the early days, the Government promoted garden villages as ‘beacons of integrated and forward-looking transport.’ A number were chosen, in part to finance a new by-pass here and a link-road or other road improvements there. Improvements that had been wanted for years.’
So in other words – is Dunsfold Park the cash-cow for road and transport improvements in Waverley, and in particular, the congested unsuitable roads around the eastern villages including Cranleigh?
In its consented masterplan, junctions on the A281 at Bramley and Guildford are earmarked for improvement, if our memory serves us well?
The report concludes that the 20 garden communities studied, risk creating up to 20,000 car-dependent households. However, we can confirm that the developers of Dunsfold have signed agreements with Surrey county council to provide public transport ‘in perpetuity’ from its site to nearby towns. A commitment that is unheard of elsewhere in the country.
The report concludes: “This is not just about delivering homes – it’s about building places that people are happy to call home. We are clear this should include sustainable transport options that support economic prosperity and well-being for resides, such as public transport, walking and cycling.”
Most garden communities – like Dunsfold Park – are in their early stages of development. The details of the Masterplan for Dunsfold will be considered by Waverley Planners shortly.
WW followers may remember those heady days when Waverley Planning Policy Officer Graham Parrott burned the midnight oil preparing Local Plan versions 1, 2 and then 3 – which then once approved by a Government Inspector became the infamous Local Plan Part 1.
The poor s*d spent 15 years working with neighbouring authorities, including Woking & Guildford. Held public consultation exercises here there and everywhere with Tom, Dick & Harriet. Attended Examinations in public – High Court hearings and Judicial Reviews – phew!
Then with Local Plan, Part 1 finally agreed by Government Inspectors; the Secretary of State; and ‘a bench’ of judges and with Local Plan Part 2 almost on the starting blocks heralding an end to the long saga of both Waverley’s and others’ Local Neighbourhood Plans in sight… Up pops Boris The Bulldozer and ‘Bob The Builder’ Jenrick. The dynamic duo begins moving the development goalposts or ‘the ball’ as we know it – to enable development to be kicked onto a completely different pitch. It has announced the biggest shake-up of planning for decades to fast-track “beautiful” new homes across the country. Whilst in the process choking off affordable housing and diluting democratic oversight.
Poor old Graham – and you won’t have heard us pitying Waverley planning officers very often – so there’s one for the scrapbook!
However, it isn’t just The Waverley Parrott that is affected. We are all about to meet our new makers. If you are not sitting down, and you haven’t seen this already, pull up a chair because this set us squawking and we suspect it will have the same effect on you? ! According to *Lichfields, under the new methods proposed by the Government for calculating housing targets, the Waverley target goes up to 835 homes per annum.
Yep – that’s right 835 – up from 590!
Read the link below and see for yourselves. Where you will see some of our Waverley neighbours’ new figures.
It even makes us here at WW as sick as poor old Parrott. How many other parrots are there in the country that have been working their ar*es off preparing Local Plans. Attending hearings – some of which were three weeks at a stretch – must have cost squillions of taxpayers’ money countrywide for paper exercises which are nothing more than a con trick to get us to accept more housing.
Town planning was a very new discipline when Nathaniel Lichfield set the company up. He was a pioneering economist and town planner, and the business was soon advising government, local authorities, and private clients on some of the country’s most significant projects – from new towns and airports, to the country’s first regional shopping centre, and the world’s most famous stadium.
It now gives practical and robust planning support for house builders, commercial developers, and local authorities as well as land owners and investors.