Frank talking on behalf of the people of Cranleigh as more bulldozers head towards Waverley’s NEW TOWN.
As if these developers give a tuppeny duck what the residents of Cranleigh want – what they really, really want!
Because from what we hear over here in Farnham, Cranleigh people really, want is some peace and respite from HGV’s thundering through their once peaceful village, and the unrelenting onward march of developers through their streets. Who are they providing homes for? The locals? No homes to satisfy the housing needs of the Woking Wimbledon and Wandsworth Wanderers!
As for the low-cost homes, for village people?
We here at the WW are totally discombobulated!
Low cost for whom exactly? No doubt the very same Cranleigh people that moved into Sirus Place in Parsonage Road, most of whom are from outside the new town! Pull the other one – it’s got cement on it! Three four and five-bed low-cost homes!
And… where did the village benefactor Lettuce and his friend Leafy (aka Vrijland and Leahy) Go? Well you know where don’t you Cranleigh residents? Laughing all the way to the nearest bank! Well, that is if there’s one open?
We notice that now the West Cranleigh Nurseries 265-home development in Elmbridge/Alfold Road has been re-named – Knowle Park. No doubt that sounds slightly more grand than mentioning that it is adjacent to a Poo Factory and to floodplains? No doubt those flooded plains will be a little further away now Lettuce and Leafy have illegally dredged the Cranleigh Waters, affected flooding further downstream, and got clean away with it?
No surprise there then for the Tory Party donors!
Sorry, Ms. Faithfull. The days you and Mr. Swinnerton cherished have long gone.
‘More Barratt’s than Berkeley’s’ was how Waverley councillors described the detailed design for the first phase of 55 executive homes on part of Cranleigh’s once green and pleasant land. So they refused its application and told the national house builder, with a reputation for providing quality homes, to go ‘back to the drawing board.’
Despite the planning ‘experts’ at ‘Your Waverley’ supporting the design of the scheme, councillors from around the borough backed the locals who claimed the development would do ‘nothing’ to enhance the character of Cranleigh – as the design and layout was ‘mediocre’ and ‘unimaginative’ and the two-three storey sentinel blocks (which the developer had wanted to be gated,) facing onto a rural lane, was out of character – and more suited to Walton and Weybridge.
This was to have been the first phase of 425 homes to be built on land behind Stocklund Square with access off Knowle Lane. Granted by a Government Inspector following an appeal.
Despite all their shoving, cajoling, pushing and prodding, the ‘experts’ were unable to lead councillors by the nose – and the scheme was rejected. Weeks earlier Berkeleys was also told it couldn’t take down ancient woodland – despite Liz The Biz Simms, ‘YW’ head honcho explaining a while back it could always be, re-planted. Ugh!
We, and probably you, would like to know –
Who is actually running the planning function at ‘YW’ – is it Gone to Potts? The Executive? The Planning Officers? Or is it the democratically elected members?
Because if it’s all the former, then why is taxpayers money being wasted on all those allowances , special responsibility payments, travelling expenses and pensions that 58 councillors are paid, when they could be done away with?
From now on officers can grant up to 25 dwellings without reference to the planning committees!
So now, a company that once hoped to be accepted in Cranleigh New Town, has upset the locals and instead of listening to all the cogent and reasonable arguments from the locals, and doing a small re-design, they are spending lots of dosh on lawyers and QC’s just to spite the taxpayer by appealing….
Remember! The company has already done this once. The original application or 425 homes was refused by ‘YW’ – not its officers of course, and allowed at appeal. The Inspector, at that time, allowed five storey homes on the site!!! Less like Cranleigh more like Canary Wharf!
Why – have they decided to Appeal! Quite simply….Because they can!
It just shows how much profit they make that they can afford to do this on a matter of pique. I suppose as their CEO awarded himself a bonus of £23 million last year and only contributes a small sum of £3 million towards infrastructure he can afford to do it. Of course if you look at it from his point of view, Berkeleys were led to believe by the WBC planners that all would be well and it would be plain sailing through the planning process, so you can imagine his frustration. The design was challenged on two main points – the 5 houses fronting Knowle Lane (a rural lane) were effectively 3 stories high, and not in keeping with Cranleigh whose vast majority of houses are only 2 stories high. Secondly the design was trying to make it look like a gated community. But as one councillor – Brian Freestone, told the Joint Planning Committee, ‘we welcome the new residents into Cranleigh, but how can we do that if they feel elite and cut off from us? This argument and others won the day. If Berkeleys had engaged with Cranleigh Parish Council, in open forum rather than behind closed doors with ‘YW, all this could probably have been avoided. Berkeley’s attempt to throw its toys out of the pram is a flagrant waste of money and will not be approved by its shareholders. Even more damaging is the cost to cash-strapped WBC and therefore us the taxpayer.
The number is 54! Yes 54 new houses headed for Elmbridge Road in Cranleigh. The decision will be made tonight (Wed 28th June; 6.30pm) at Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee. We urge you to attend and make your voice heard!
N.B. The Met Office has just issued a Flood Warning for Cranleigh Waters: “For Cranleigh Waters, the areas affected include Elmbridge, Shamley Green and Bramley and the Littlemead Brook including Cranleigh.”
The map below shows the area between Elmbridge at the top and the blue Littlemead Brook stream at the bottom which is.. subject to tonight’s Planning Application (Planning Ref : WA/2016/1921) recommended for Approval by Officers for 54 homes.
Our friends at the Cranleigh Society say: “This entire site was underwater in Dec 2013/Jan 2014 – the road, which was higher than the site, was impassable. In January 2015 about 30% of the site was flooded. And then there’s the smell from the sewage works..” Thakeham Homes have stated that “odour is not considered to be a constraint to residential development at the site”.
Those three little blue SUD’s will be working overtime!
We agree with the Cranleigh Society – write to Anne Milton, Cranleigh’s MP and ask her to ‘call in’ this outrageous application. Email her on email@example.com with reference WA/2016/1921 Land South Of Elmbridge Road, Cranleigh – perhaps notice will be taken if lots of people request it!
This is a letter sent out to supporters of The Cranleigh Civic Society – from the people…
Dear Members and Friends
As you are aware, Cranleigh Civic Society held a meeting in the Village Hall on 25th May to discuss the planning permission already granted and the further huge amount of housing being earmarked for Cranleigh in the draft Local Plan. Many residents expressed their deep concerns about the relentless growth of new housing in Cranleigh, particularly as Waverley Borough Council has simply not dealt with Cranleigh’s serious infrastructure problems first. At the end of the meeting, local residents took a vote of “NO CONFIDENCE” in the Leadership of Waverley Borough Council
226 FOR 1 AGAINST (this was a Waverley Borough Councillor) 2 ABSTENTIONS (we think from people who live outside of Cranleigh)
We have written to Julia Potts, the Leader of Waverley Borough Council, to confirm the vote of “No Confidence” taken by those attending the public meeting: Dear Ms Potts As you are aware, Cranleigh Civic Society recently organised a public meeting at our village hall at which we shared our knowledge of what is happening now, and what is being planned for the future of our village. Many of the 229 people who attended passionately expressed their anger and concerns about the volume of housing your team has approved to be built on our green fields and how many more you intend to send our way. Equal to this were the worries about how our already poor infrastructure will cope with the huge increase in the population. As promised, I relayed your message of how much you care about our village, and I must tell you it was not well received. At the end of the meeting we offered the opportunity for them to vote by a show of hands if they wanted to send you a strong and clear message that they do not have confidence in your team’s ability to care for the quality of our lives and wellbeing through your actions and inaction; 226 voted to support this statement, one opposed and two abstained. I trust this message is clear. Phill Price Chairman Cranleigh Civic Society
We have not received a reply from this letter yet.
Also discussed at the meeting was the petition we have been running to ask our MP to insist on our drinking water to be tested for the risk from asbestos, as 29.6% of our water pipes are made from asbestos cement. The petition has now closed at 714 signatures and we have now sent this to Anne Milton for her action. What are the next steps? We are now investigating the options available to us and we will let you know when we know more.
What can we all do? – Write to your MP Anne Milton NOW (email firstname.lastname@example.org). Whilst we as the Cranleigh Civic Society are strictly non-political, you may feel that you have been let down by your MP in not stopping the relentless attack by housing developers on Cranleigh’s green fields, particularly as it is Government Policy that brown field sites should be built on nationally first. – Write to the Waverley Borough Councillors (details are on their website) to tell them you are not happy with the way the decisions are made. – Object online on all applications you feel are unsustainable – details are on our website – Turn up at the Council Offices at The Bury’s, Godalming when the Joint Planning Committee meet to vote on the larger housing applications. The public gallery only has a few seats so either turn up early or turn up just for the arrival of the councillors before the meeting so that they can see that people of Cranleigh do really care. – If not already done, subscribe to the updates from our website, so you are informed of any news
We will update the website in the next few days with diary dates for the upcoming Little Meadow application, Springbok Inquiry, Dunsfold Inquiry, etc
Jane Price Membership Secretary Cranleigh Civic Society
Don’t hold your breath, because ‘Your Waverley’ doesn’t give a jot what Cranleigh people think. If it did, it wouldn’t be putting out RFP’s (Request for Proposal) to sports consultants around the country to build a new Leisure Centre on the Snoxhall Playing fields – on land held by Cranleigh Parish Council on behalf of its residents!
Here they go, here they go… to…Alfold…Dunsfold…Ewhurst…Horsham or the lowest bidder?
A decision by “Your Waverley” and … for the moment – by, others … UNKNOWN, – may have signalled the end of one of the oldest football clubs in Surrey.
The insensitivity of Waverley Borough Council could prove to be the last straw that breaks the back of Cranleigh’s 124 year-old Football Club…
** Ah well! What happens in Farnham to-day – happens to Cranleigh and the rest of the borough tomorrow!
By providing £173,000 towards an All Weather Football Pitch at – Cranleigh Public School
Please Sir – can you find Cranleigh footballers a new home?
It is widely known locally, that Berkeleys had promoted other schemes to improve the lives of young and old – as part of its contribution towards the creation of Cranleigh new Town.
It offered ‘Your Waverley a £1.3m community building on part of its site of 425 new homes between Knowle Lane and Alfold Road, Cranleigh. This was scuppered by a Cranleigh borough/parish councillor!
It is also well-known locally that Park Mead School requires £25,000 towards improving its facilities!
But ‘Your Waverley’ – decided it was prudent to provide £173,000 to one of the country’s top private schools. At a time when the car park to the Snoxhall Playing fields is closed due to health and safety hazards and the Snoxhall Pavilion, where senior and youth footballers took cold showers throughout the Winter, – is, a disgrace !
This sentence is taken from the council papers in a list of contributions by Berkeley Homes, as part of an Infrastructure package. Other developers are putting money into Cranleigh Arts Centre.
However, at behind closed doors meetings with officers, Cranleigh borough and county councillors and the developer, Berkeley Homes’ offer was shunned in favour of…the above.
The details of a £3m legal agreement that Berkeley Homes will contribute for infrastructure were recently revealed by officers. There was an outcry at a recent public meeting when villagers learned that it included £173,000 for a synthetic pitch to be constructed near Glebelands School. Waverley planners were considering details of the first (55) of four phases of 425 homes planned at the back of Stocklund Square.
Waverley Web asks ..was no thought at all given to grass-roots sport in Cranleigh?
This latest revelation, for the cash-strapped football club, could now be the final straw – and at a meeting last week, the club warned – it may have to leave Cranleigh after 124 years!
One player wrote to the Waverley Web saying: “the shock revelation that this huge sum of money has been contributed towards a pitch for Cranleigh School – and that villagers will have to pay to use it, is the final kick in the crotch for our players.
We have been struggling for years. It costs four times as much for our teams to play in Cranleigh than in any of the other villages around – the facilities at Snoxhall are non-existent, and quite frankly are a disgrace. The parish council has recently closed the car park – and we have heard to-day that we, and visiting teams, will in future, have to pay to use it. Which is against League rules, and we may be thrown out!
We feel we no longer belong in our own village. We believe Waverley Council is considering building a new Leisure Centre on part of our playing fields – and we understand, the parish council, who owns the land is trying to “protect them” from the land grabbers at Waverley. So if we leave Cranleigh perhaps we will be doing everyone a favour?”
It may be too late, but some thought needs to be given to ensuring the development and success of grass root sport in Cranleigh, particularly football, which attracts over 400 youngsters and older players every Saturday.
We want to know? – Where are all the children of all these families proposing to live here going to play sport in the future?
** Farnham folk Petitioned the Queen to remove the town from Waverley. Cranleigh folk take a Vote of No Confidence in Waverley. Farnham’s Memorial Hall and playing fields used by the football club, kicked out and moved elsewhere. Waverley has its eye on Cranleigh football grounds ….and Haslemere’s youth facilities.. etc … Sound familiar?
Not Tonight Josephine – but Wednesday – Waverley Planners – will view the detailed drawings and Reserved Matters – concerning the first phase (55) of the Berkeley Bunnies new 425 home burrow – on the former Bonham Trust Land behind Stocklund Square in Cranleigh.
The mainly two storey dwellings will be three, four and five bed homes with access onto Knowle Lane.
Along with all the other developers in Waverley, they have convinced officers, and members alike, that the two and a half storey homes are just that. Well – just go and view other Crest Nicholson/Berkeley developments and see what you think. They are three storey houses in everything but name.
As you will see there is a very strong presence from Councillors representing Cranleigh!
Here’s what the parish council – the local watchdog – has to say, will anyone take one blind bit of notice… here come the diggers!
Strong concerns over the movement of construction traffic on Knowle Lane.
The dwellings are higher than those planned forAmlets Lane and the pitched roofs are considered to be too steep and should be reduced.
The proposed footpath is inadequate for pedestrians as there is only adequate space for one person.
This is a wetspot, highlighting flash flooding in the area at the carnival in 2016.
The roads are too narrow and should be made wider to support passing traffic.
The proposed garages would obstruct the highway, causing a lack of space for access.
Object to the ornamental entrance gate as the site must be inclusive, not exclusive. This also includes the brick wall which would create a separation and social exclusion from Cranleigh.
The SuDS scheme is not yet agreed and would need to be heavily relied upon.
Members would like a CEMP to be made a condition of this application.Additional response:
– Gate should be removed from the entrance
– Estate roads are too narrow, and cars will parkalong them restricting access for emergencyvehicles and refuse collection lorries.
– Plots 4, 51, 52 and 53 are 45% higher thanneighbouring properties. The two storey houses have been increased to make the three storey houses look less intrusive.
– Plots 4 and 51 are within a metre of the pavement, making them appear as gateways which would cause harm to the character and appearance of the lane as appears urban.
– Plots 4, 51, 52 and 53 are located opposite Snoxhall Fields ASVI and would be harmful as too bulky and large.
It is contrary to the Cranleigh Design Statement.
and.. last but not least.. the transport Statement refers to a roundabout being built to service a new private nursing home (formerly intended to be a replacement hospital) but its permission has now lapsed, so the developer should not rely upon this roundabout.
Needless to say – there is no objection from the county highway authority or the flood authority. Surprise, surprise!
Oh! dear – we hear you cry over there in the East… pesky trees,(areas that have been wooded since 1600)getting in the way of progress! How dare they put their roots down into the soil and get in the way of developers?
Anyway, what’s an ancient tree between friends – after all wasn’t it Waverley’s head planning honcho that told the voting fodders’ Cranleigh representatives that … “ancient woodland could always be re-planted.’ When detailed consent to build 425 homes was granted Liz the Biz told ‘YW’s’ senior planning committee that, although felling of ancient woodland was required to provide an access from Knowle Lane for the first phase of (50) of Berkeley’s scheme – the loss of trees was, ‘not significant.’ So that’s alright then!
Is that the sound of ancient trees we hear … biting the Cranleigh dust?
Now of course, another belt of ancient trees pictured below, and which have the added protection of Tree Preservation Orders, are in the way of BB’s burrowing. Tomorrow, the eastern planing committee will be asked to allow the BB’s to remove the Tree Preservation Orders – as they are in their way.
Oh! and doesn’t that look like a road going through the parkland into Cranleigh New Town? If not, we suspect it soon will be.
Read more on the Cranleigh Civic Society website: Oh! and by the way, almost everyone in the borough is being blamed for this blog! So let’s make it clear. We have NOTHING to do with the Cranleigh Society, we simply follow the site AND APPLAUD IT’S HARD WORK AND DILIGENCE!
Sad that the consent to cut down ancient woodland for the access road, but now the remaining beautiful trees are about to become sawdust! The BB’s have told the planners – they are, “a potential significant further barrier to delivery of the development”
Oops excuse us ignorant souls, but it’s not like the trees just appeared on site, after all they are ancient!! Definition below:The attack just goes on and on… is it time the Waverley spider wrapped its web around its neck and just hung itself? Answers to : email@example.com
You can object here: The meeting of the Eastern Area Planning Committee takes place tomorrow, May 17.
Yes, folks, you guessed it, Bob Lees, Chairman of Protect Our (Little Corner) of Waverley, has been busy welcoming the Secretary of State’s decision to call-in the Dunsfold Park application on behalf of ‘the thousands who protested against [the] proposal’. And, in the process, taking the opportunity to spread more of this duplicitous organisation’s propaganda and misinformation.
Where were Bob Lees and his cohorts – who claim to care so much about protecting ‘Our Waverley’ a week ago when the Knowle Park Initiative (KPI) was granted planning consent for 265 homes on a flood plain at the aptly named Cranleigh Waters?
“WHERE ARE YOU NOW POW COW”?
Were they out in their thousands – their hundreds even – in support of Cranleigh residents who feel ‘under represented, bullied and victimised’, according to a Cranleigh Parish Councillor?
Not on your nelly! Presumably, they were too busy watching box-sets of Brookside to remind themselves of the horrors that await them if housing is ever built at Dunsfold Park!
According to our Cranleigh correspondent, looking for representatives – even one member of POW would have done! – in the public gallery at The Burys It was a classic case of Where’s Wally?
It would seem Bob Lees has been so busy spewing his views on Dunsfold Park’s call-in, he entirely overlooked to send anyone along to object to the KPI proposals! No surprises there then!!! Had he done so maybe, just maybe, Councillor Isherwood (now known as that ‘Plonker Isherwood’ – in honour of Del Boy’s hapless brother Rodney, might have thought twice before he used his casting vote to force through an application that divided the Planning Committee and had ‘bullied and victimised’ Cranleigh residents crying into their cornflakes the following morning.
WHY, don’t they represent the wider Waverley? POW – Stands for Protect OUR WAVERLEY – So where were you when we were all objecting to major developments in the countryside in FARNHAM?
In all but name they are a reincarnation of Stop Dunsfold Park New Town, a campaign group specifically set up to protect their little corner of the borough – Alfold and Dunsfold.
Cranleigh is a mere six miles up the road from Alfold and Dunsfold – less as the crow flies – but POW don’t put a toe out of bed, let alone outside their front doors to protest against anything unless it has the name Dunsfold Park in it!
Cranleigh and its infrastructure is on its knees, bowing under the weight of over a 1000 new houses that have all been consented since POW was formed!
Do they give a damn? Do they hell! In fact, the more the merrier in Cranleigh, Godalming and Farnham as far as Protect our Little Corner is concerned. The more houses the surrounding towns take the better for Alfold and Dunsfold!
Is this disingenous bunch even aware of all th e other planning applications in the pipeline on the green fields of aloofly and Dunsfold? No why would they be?
In the Press recently :Mr Lies (Ooops! must be a Fruedian slip of the fingers, we meant to type Lees – really we did!) refers to ‘inadequate promises of contributions by[Dunsfold Park] to infrastructure’. INADEQUATE CONTRIBUTIONS? Hello! Wakey, wakey! What the f**k is inadequate about a rumoured £50 million pounds worth of contributions? We don’t see any other developer in or around Cranleigh offering anything like that level of contributions to improve local infrastructure or, for that matter, their combined contributions approaching anywhere near that sum … or have we missed something?
And what about Mr Lies (ooops! that finger’s got a mind of its own!) claims, that the Environment Agency and Surrey County Highways had made substantial objections? Yes, they did have some objections but what Mr Lies (Ooops!), oh so conveniently, forgot to clarify was that those objections have been overcome.
But then Mr Lies (Ooops! We did it again) and his cohorts at ‘P O L Corner’ have form in this respect. They littered the countryside, they claim to be so keen to protect, with dirty great banners in which they asserted that housing at Dunsfold Park would add 42-MINUTES delays to journey times.
So alarmed were we, at Waverley Web, by those startling numbers that we spent days trawling through the planning papers in an effort to substantiate them and what did we discover? That the statement – or should we say lies? – had been taken entirely out of context and deliberately misreported.
What they should have said was that WITHOUT development at Dunsfold Park, delays on the A281 in the coming years could reach 42 minutes but WITH the MITIGATION that development at Dunsfold Park would bring those delays would be reduced to 2 MINUTES! Strikes us that alone is a good enough reason to build houses at Dunsfold Park!
We wish the government wasn’t forcing thousands more homes on Surrey – and Waverley in particular – but they are and that being the case we need to protect as much of our countryside as we can – not just Alfold and Dunsfold! And that means building on previously developed brownfield sites, not the precious green fields in the NorthSouth,East and West.
Our advice to Mr Lies (Ooops!) and Co – horts is either start protecting the entire borough of Waverley – although you’ve left it a bit bloody late for that! – or rename yourselves Protect our Ass!
And if you Really, really want to protect the entire borough, why don’t you start right now by lobbying Matron Milton and the Secretary of State to call-in the KPI application because, as we all know, there’s reasons-a-plenty for so doing!
NEWS IN BRIEF Elsewhere, writing in the Surrey Ad’s ever decreasing letters page recently, a Jane Winder (Whiner more like!) claims that ‘Those who actually know [Dunsfold Park], understand full well that it is an unsuitable and unsustainable place?’
Really? Really? REALLY?
So tell us, Ms Whiner, what’s so unsustainable about a village with direct access onto the A281, it’s own shops, it’s own primary school, health centre, church, recreation facilities and a developer-subsidised bus service to Guildford, Horsham and all points inbetween?
In our humble opinion, that makes this proposed new village a damn sight more sustainable than Dunsfold Village where we understand you live! Dunsfold village doesn’t have a school, or a GP and the village shop relies on volunteers. All well and good but, actually, it’s selfish people like you, opting to live in the middle of nowhere, who are generating all the traffic on the A281 that people like you are so busy complaining about as you have to get in your cars to go anywhere. Come to think of it, a new village at Dunsfold Park makes Alfold and Dunsfold more sustainable and less of a drain on the rest of us as you can walk to their facilities instead of driving along the A281 to Cranleigh, Godalming, Guildford and Horsham! Time to stop whining Ms Winder and start thinking about your own impact on society.
Sing-along with Brian ‘Your Waverley’s’ very own Howard Keel!
The last thing those over in the East of the borough want to hear are Waverley bloody councillors sobbing into their cornflakes over the misery they are inflicting on those “poor old villages in the East”
Councillor Anna James (Witley/Hambledon ) pictured above in a warm embrace with Planning Portfolio Holder Brian Adams (Frensham/Dockenfield & Tilford ) joined the Sobbing women brigade when she helped him dump another 265 houses on Cranleigh last week.
But whilst joining the overflowing “Chamber Pot” of councillors that is now ‘Your Waverley’ she smugly said how “very sorry” she was for Cranleigh and the villages –
” I feel sorry in my heart for the people of Cranleigh,”
she cried into her microphone. and continued …. saying said she had only been a councillor for five years and all she had heard from the get-go was “Cranleigh’s expansion.” First one development then another, the place was just getting wider and wider – a bit like Bordon in Hampshire.
Ending with – yes you guessed – “I feel really feel very sorry for Cranleigh and my heart goes out ………………..!” Well your heart may go out but it certainly doesn’t stop your hand going up, does it?
Followed by “I have every sympathy…………. Yeah, we get it…Yadah, yadah, yada You’re really, really, really sorry for Cranleigh – instead of crying crocodile tears, why don’t you just shut the hell up and give the place a break, why don’t you!
Well Councillor James, be afraid be very afraid, because if Dunsfold goes down, and we at Waverley Web think it’s all over bar the shouting at Dunsfold since the Deputy Dominatrix stuck her nose in, then there’s going to be a bloody great HOLE in the daft local Plan that’s going to be filled by dipping into the Green Belt. Which could herald development in fortress CHIDDINGFOLD, Milford, Elstead, Haslemere, around Godalming, over here in Farnham’s fields and even in Bramley, where the Green Belt has already been sacrificed… ask By-Pass Byham, who was only too happy to offer it up like a sacrificial lamb in aid of his Tory-Tosser friend!
Then John Gray (Dunsfold) joined the sobbing women, saying how sorry he was for Cranleigh – but not sorry enough to vote against more homes going onto green fields! Of course not… he’s too busy protecting that ruddy great Brown field on his doorstep! Whilst voting twice this year for development in the – GREEN BELT!
Councillor May Foryszewski’s response to all the sobbing was – “I just cannot believe what I am hearing here tonight!” Really? Really? Really? – Come on, Cranleigh’s very own Valkyrie, how long have you been listening to this? It’s par for the course! And, let’s face it your colleagues aren’t going to give up until the East and the West are covered in concrete! Perhaps you should be having some strong words with you TT colleagues?
Oh Carole (Cockburn) then joined the sodding sobbers, saying she felt a bit like Cranleigh people – “Punch drunk.” and then proceeded to stick her Farnham mit in the air, saying when it was refused “last time” it was “isolated” but now that all the other sites had been allowed around it, this was no longer the case!
Then afterwards, they all went asobbing into their G & T’s whilst the Champagne corks popped for the Flying Dutchman’s – who is just another GRQ- Cranleigh developer.
And the sad thing is, there’s more to come, much more! Watch this space, cos you aint seen nothing yet!
another 20 or so on the Infant School site in Church Lane.
Around 90 on the Junior School site in the centre of the High Street off Parsonage Road,
Another extension to Horsham Road by Crest Nicholson (100);
But bring it all on why don’t you, because according to the late Cranleigh Councillor Brian Ellis, shopkeepers – “need more foot fall.” May he Rest in …..?
At this rate, footfall is all anyone is going to get in Cranleigh because the traffic from these developments is going to create the mother of all snarl ups. Maybe that’s the secret plan: bumper- to – bumper traffic in Cranleigh to ensure motorists look in the shop windows at they attempt to negotiate the High Street. Never mind, drive-ins, in Cranleigh it could be drive-bye…bye!
Forget Nightmare on Elm Street – it’s Nightmare on Cranleigh High Street!!
Just when you thought it was safe to heave a huge sigh of relief, Povey-Power is about to be inflicted all over again on the East of the Borough!
In a classic case of Hobson’s Choice: the Tory-Tossers had to choose between Uriah Heep (AKA Alan Young) & Fagin (Andrew Povey). Some choice!
We told you all about the Pre-Election Stress Disorder phenomenon that struck the East of the borough just a few weeks ago.
Now, hang onto your blue rosettes, because Post Election Stress Disorder is about to hit the High Street as ‘The Comeback Kid’ ricochets back onto the Cranleigh / Ewhurst scene! No doubt The Surrey Ad has swopped its allegiance now its usual Kodak Kid has been ditched in four of its NBF (New best friend) – Kodak Povey!
“If you are out there Rosaleen Egan – get your Rebocks on and hit the Cranleigh / Ewhurst pavements because Jesus Mary and the Joseph – AKA Guildford Conservative Associations – has just answered all your prayers!
Now, take a deep breath and readers of a sensitive disposition look away, because this news comes with a Waverley Web health warning! Who’s soon going to be pulling ‘Your Surrey’s’ county council strings?
Sadly the new broom many over there in the East had hoped would sweep County Hall clean and restore faith in local politics – Phillip Townsend – has not been selected to stand. No! we hear you cry! NO, surely it cannot be?
Here’s your candidates: it’s called HOBSONS CHOICE.
In the Blue Corner –
Here you have Andrew Povey – disgraced former `leader of Surrey County Council, who with a knockout blow, beat off the competition.
It really is quite extraordinary that with a population of over 300 hundred million people the USA could only dredge up two totally unsuitable people to compete for the Presidency – Clinton and Trump?
Likewise, in the whole of Eastern Waverley – with a population of 12/13,000 soon to be nearer 20,000! – the Tory Tossers were reduced to sending in the disgraced former leader Gotta-pick-a-pocket-or-two-or-three – none other than Dr (as he likes to be known!) Andrew Povey.
Want to read more about the disgraced former Leader of Surrey County Council, whose colleagues took a vote of no confidence in him, and yet is now predicted to be Surrey County Council’s very own Comeback Kid? Bet David Hodge & Co can hardly wait?!?! Even some of them will be registering in Cranleigh and voting UKIP!
Really makes you wonder doesn’t it? The man pictured above by our own staff photographer, is the very same man who introduced Politics with a great big capital P into the village council chamber over 20 years ago, abandoned it for his race up Surrey County Council’s greasy pole, reaching the top only to slide down it faster than Usain Bolt on speed ! Now selected to take over the reins of Uriah Young (AKA Alan Young) . But when we look at who they’ve replaced him with we can’t help wondering why they bothered?