Residents of the area around Scotland Lane were out in force on the first day of the public inquiry.

They say they will battle relentlessly to save the haven for wildlife close to the South Downs National Park they cherish.

Developer Redwood South West is appealing against Waverley’s refusal for 50 homes on Haslemere’s controversial Red Court site. The hearing will be played out over the coming days until December 23rd and again on January 6th before Government Inspector Helen Hockenhull. 

Having taken a Part 6 role in the proceedings, which gives residents, including associations and Haslemere Vision, equal status to speak at length and possibly cross-examine the developer, Haslemere people are out in droves.

However, Barrister for Redwoods, Heather Sargeant, claims that the site, once included in Waverley’s Draft Local Plan Part 2 and was recommended for approval by Waverley’s planning officers, is a natural extension to the nearby settlement. During a heated debate Waverley councillors refused the scheme in July.  Build anywhere, or even everywhere, in the borough of Waverley – except in Haslemere?

It is of low density – only 17 dwellings per acre and provides affordable homes in a town and a borough with no five-year housing land supply and an acute need.

 On Thursday last week, residents had their say when they expressed their dire concerns for road safety in Scotland Lane and on Museum Hill, particularly with a virtual pavement proposed by the developers. However, there are no such concerns put forward by the statutory authority – Surrey County Councils Highway experts. 

But it was resident Howard Brown who painted a picture of a site that has become a haven for wildlife aided by environmentally conscious residents.

Although we couldn’t see the picture of Roe Dear caught in security fencing here at the Waverley Web, he told the Inspector some images were”too distressing for anyone to witness.”

He stressed the area was a wildlife corridor between the site and the nearby homes, most of whom had encouraged and assisted various species in their ability to thrive.

He said the paddocks had been used for the past 20 years for a horse and a couple of sheep and he provided the Inspector with a long list of birds, insects and animals that inhabited the whole site and nearby gardens.

These included: A “rich and plentiful supply of Dormice, including Hazel dormice – an endangered species. 

These include Shrews, voles; badgers; slow worms; lizards, sand lizards; toads. Grass snakes and adders. All of which would be killed if development was allowed. There were many birds due to the rich tree cover with Bats, Pheasants – and a rich harem of friends – Goldfinch, starlings, greater spotted woodpeckers, owls, cuckoos, pigeons, nightingales and buzzards. Hungry Haslemere Hedgehogs and Squirrels were abundant because nearby homes had not fenced off the wildlife. 

Equally important to the area are the dark skies. Both animals and humans need dark skies. We can see both Jupiter and her Moons. We can see the Milky Way and all the stars. The heat haze from concrete will blot out those stars against the background of the  National Park and the setting of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

He claimed the owners of Red Court had deliberately mowed close to the hedges, put up notices, and erected Dear traps on the south side of the AONB land, which had effectively penned the animals in. The Police, Waverley and the R.S.P.C.were contacted but took no action as the animals were unprotected by law. He had distressing pictures ånd videos. 

The Barrister for Redwoods, Heather Sargeant, argued the immediate surroundings were not undeveloped. Neither do they accept that the development would negatively affect the National Park because there are intervening trees in the land corridors? Vegetation to the South of the site would form a sufficient buffer.

The inquiry continues today Monday – and is a webcast on the Waverley Council site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The final countdown.

We won’t bore you with every stroke of the tennis match – Waverley -v- Thakeham Homes as they swung their racquets and fired planning policy balls across the hallowed chambers of Waverley Towers as the Inquiry reached its conclusion.

But suffice to say- in our humble opinion – Thakeham emerged victorious by at least two sets to one! 

Inspector Harold Stevens looked visibly shaken at the final hearing, having trotted around Dunsfold, Haslemere, Cranleigh  – excluding Farnham, a site he intended to visit on his way home.

No surprise that neither party could agree on the list of deliverable sites, which influenced Waverley’s crucial 5-year land supply of new homes.

Areas of contention:

Waverley hung on to its claim that it matters not if permission on some small sites had expired; they may come forward sometime in the future! So the appellant was WRONG!

As for other more significant sites, even if unlikely to come forward, the council contend that if it is “realistic and not fanciful” and they could come forward – then they should form part of its 5-year HLS. Which it maintains is 5.2 years. 

Thakeham is sticking to its estimate of the borough’s supply of just 3.76 years.

The grass was undoubtedly becoming greener for Barrister Robin Green when he fired his first and only ACE.

Local Plan Part 2 has now been agreed by Waverley, will be submitted to the Inspectorate on Tuesday and will be examined next year!

No mention that it has been four years in the making! But then we will leave that one to Barrister and planning star Sasha White because when he starts smashing his racquet through the housing figures, it is a sight to behold.

Mr Green argued that the Strategic Planning Document for Dunsfold would be agreed in February next year. Although matters were delayed somewhat, there was extant planning permission, and the site was ripe for development.  There were no outstanding technical issues to prevent a rapid build-out.

Housing is being delivered in the district, allbeit not at the pace expected when Local Plan Part 1 was adopted. But it is my conclusion that the addition of 99 houses to a small village that has already absorbed 229 new dwellings would not be the limited growth planned for Alfold until the year 2o32. Nor is it sustainable to add more and more houses to a location that has few services and facilities and poor connections to larger settlements. It will also harm the character and appearance of the local area.

He acknowledged the need for market and affordable homes in the borough, but the adverse impact of building them in Alfold outweighed the benefits, and the appeal should be REFUSED. 

Thakeham’s final say will be out in another post.

To be continued…

 

 

 

 

MISSING IN ACTION!

Alfold Parish councillors have been notably absent from a six-day public inquiry. An inquiry that could land another 99 homes off the busy Loxwood Road in the countryside. 

They seek them here; they seek them there,
those beleaguered Alfold residents seek their councillors everywhere!
Are they in Devon or lounging in the Caribbean?
Those damned elusive councillors certainly won’t be going to Heaven!

They meddle in the Council Chamber
Zooming in and out each week,
spoiling ev’ry planning application.
What a bloody cheek!

So come on, Jackie – do the business and start roughing up Alfold Parish Council after ‘all every little helps!’ And if anyone parish council needs help in this beleaguered borough it is the one that is all too often referred to as “poor old Alfold.”

Perhaps that’s why ‘Your Waverley’ didn’t even bother to webcast it. Watch the current Haslemere public Inquiry and spot the difference!

Thank you to the follower who sent us the cartoon.

The highly contentious appeal against Waverley’s refusal to allow Redwood to build 50 homes in Scotland Land, Haslemere begins today Thursday. The Inquiry will begin at 10.30 a.m. Contact WBC to participate on Zoom or hit the webcast.  

https://www.waverley.gov.uk/Services/Planning-and-building/Planning-appeals-and-inquiries/Land-at-Scotland-Lane-Haslemere

http://APP/R3650/W/21/3278196

The Council Chamber at Waverley Towers is still warm from the Hollyoaks, Loxwood Rd Alfold Inquiry which ended yesterday.

Why wasn’t that webcast Waverley Borough Council? Is there something not quite so special about “poor old Alfold” as it is often referred to by councillors?

For the past six-days Sussex-based developer, Thakeham Homes has fought tirelessly to persuade a Government Inspector to allow 99 homes in the countryside.

A post on Day 6 of the Alfold inquiry, the final submissions following crucial site visits including those in Haslemere will follow soon on the Waverley Web blog.

Previous days. A resident describes the ‘ real Alfold’ whilst a developer has a very different vision for the village’s future.

Day 2 – Alfold Inquiry – You couldn’t see the wood for the trees.

Has Thakeham Homes shredded Waverley’s five-year housing land supply figures?

Day 4. Alfold Public Inquiry. Is ‘ Your Waverley’ in a sticky situation?

WA/2020/1684 Scotland Lane. Timetable. 16-December. Free Day on Friday. Monday 20, Tuesday 21, Wednesday 22  and Thursday 23rd and 6th January. (all subject to change)

Redwood’s reasons for seeking Government approval at the Inquiry are as follows:

 The planning balance will be struck through the significant planning benefits that the Appeal Proposals have to offer.

The Appellant will provide cogent reasons why planning permission should be granted and demonstrate that there are no significant adverse impacts to granting planning permission that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

The reasons that the Appellant requests an Inquiry are:

• Significant public interest in the application including circa 500 representations, including local interest groups and the Town Council;
• Objection from the Surrey Hills AONB unit and relevance in respect of the AONB setting. The NPPF July 2021 Revision now references the setting of the AONB setting, where it will undoubtedly be a key issue of debate;
• The Local Landscape Designation of the Site;
• The position of the emerging Haslemere Neighbourhood Plan, which will likely be adopted by the Inquiry and thus a detailed opportunity to scrutinise its policies will be required;
• The Appeal proposals, forwarded by the Appellant for a Section 106 which would secure appropriate Wealden Heaths SPA avoidance measures, and the consequential wider public benefits arising, and potential implications for Local Plan Part 2 on this matter;
• The position in respect of the most important policies in the Local Plan Part 1 which restrict the supply of housing and the due weight to be provided to them against the Appeal Proposal, when the development plan is read as a whole. This is s position on Five Year Housing land supply, and the relevance of other S.78 Appeal Decisions in the Borough; and Connected to the five-year housing land supply, availability and deliverability of housing land over the whole LPP1 plan period is the approach and timing of the major strategic allocation at Dunsfold (and others), which requires scrutiny via an Inquiry process.
• The implications of the substantive delay in adopting a complete Local Plan (LPP1 found sound by Inspector based on the fact that LPP2 would be adopted by 2019) and the acute need to identify deliverable sites require cross-examination.
• Demonstrating how consent will help restore the 5-year land supply and primacy of the Development Plan, but moreover, the ability to make an early boost to supply within Haslemere. Detailed evidence and trajectory analysis is required. The implications arising from the 5-year review of LPP1 is due to be completed within 19 months (February 2023), given the substantial increased Housing Need for the Borough under the latest Standard Method figures (a substantive increase over LPP1 OAN figure, before adjustment for unmet needs) requires examination and underlines the urgency of the local housing crisis 3.47.
• Waverley’s reason for refusal.

 

On Day 5 of the Alfold Public Inquiry, Thakeham Homes was relentless in its punishing attack on Waverley’s “out of date” Local Plans.

http://Appeal: APP/R3650/W/21/3278196 – Land at Hollyoak Loxwood Rd, Alfold.

Thakeham claimed was LP Part 1 was “out of date, and  LP Part 2, pulled by the Tories shortly before the last election, had languished with the new authority for three years.

When inspector Harold Stevens asked why? He was told it was all down to “politics.”

“unlikely to ever be endorsed by an Inspector under examination and its 5.2 year housing land supply  included developments that were either, unachievable, unviable, undeliverable or unsustainable in locations in Dunsfold, Haslemere, Farnham,  Cranleigh, Milford or Hindhead.

Speaking  On behalf of Thakeham Homes in its bid to build 99 homes at Alfold  Crossways – poacher turned gamekeeper, and former Reading Council planning officer Timothy Burden said he sympathised with the challenges Waverley faced.   

The borough’s environmental constraints made it one of the most constrained boroughs in the country.

Waverley’s Barrister Robin Green said Waverley LP Part 2 could be with the Inspectorate within a matter of days, and Inspector Stevens could have an e-mail on its way to him notifying him shortly.

However, Mr  Burden said:

I would be absolurely amazed if its Local Plan Part 2 is found to be sound under examination. I think it will fall into an abyss! I will only believe it when I see it.”

Without a sound LP2 (which earmarks Waverley’s future housing growth, including site allocations) combined with its out of date Local Plan, in which he claimed there was a shortfall of 4,000 homes due in part to Dunsfold not going ahead, which has led to losing about 350 homes per year.

He said:

As controversial as this suggestion may  sound to many, the council would be better off starting on a new Local Plan

Waverley’s Barrister Robin Green asked Mr Burden if a significant part of the developer’s case was that both LP1 and LP2 were out of date. To which Mr. responded, yes.

Throughout the Inquiry, Thakeham has criticised the lack of Neighbourhood Plans in the borough and Alfold. They said they had searched through Alfold Parish Council minutes for any information on its NP, but its last published minutes were dated November 2018.   

We canot find any evidence of progress on its Neighbourhood Plan, either we cannot find it or it has stalled and simply doesn’t exist.” 

Thakeham claimed an acute shortage of affordable homes (AH) in Waverley, with many consented sites not meeting the AH threshold. In the life of the plan, 547 AH homes were built – a shortfall of 1,753. The housing shortage in Waverley and Surrey was more acute than elsewhere in the country, and the average house price was £500,000 – twice the national average.

The development now proposed by The Merchant Seaman’s War Memorial Society and Thakeham Homes would have a basket of benefits, including 30% AH’s, market housing, bus stops, traffic calming and a demand response bus service. The Charity would also benefit from a capital receipt. If, or when the Dunsfold Garden Village was built, Alfold residents would benefit from all the facilities proposed there.

Thakeham’s Barrister Sasha White said a 106 legal agreement between Waverley, Surrey County Council and the developers would be signed over the next few days, together with conditions covering the site’s development.

Waverley’s Barrister maintained that Alfold had already taken more than its fair share of development. Due to its lack of infrastructure, it should only accept an amount of housing commensurate with its size.

Villagers are asking? Are the developers putting the champagne on ice before embarking on its previous much bigger scheme if it gets this appeal in the bag?

Today Wednesday, the Inspector visits proposed sites in Dunsfold, Haslemere, Hindhead, Haslemere, and Farnham.

Closing statements at 1.45 pm.