Tag: Godalming

Godalming Town Council backs residents’ fight – plans just not good enough for green belt site.

Residents, backed by Waverley Councillor Paul Follows ensured that everyone was made aware of the threat of expansion into their treasured green belt countryside at Aarons Hill. 

Last night after a packed meeting Godalming Town Council heard some well-researched concerns and objections from residents and councillors alike. And the townsfolk were rewarded for their efforts getting the backing they had hoped for!

WW can’t help wondering why so many town councillors, who are also borough councillors backed a Local Plan that rolled back Godalming’s green belt in the first place? Could it be because they are Tories – one of whom later gave his Lib Dem colleague an ear-bashing!

A  resident told us that Tory “Town and borough Councillor, Comrade  Stefan  ” I voted for the Labour Party’ Reynolds’  interrupted his Lib Dem colleague after Councillor Follows claimed he was the only Waverley councillor in the room who didn’t vote for Waverley’s  Local Plan which included removing this site from the greenbelt! Following, Follows –    Comrade Reynold retorted – ‘well I didn’t!’ after which   – Councillor Follows was forced to remind him –  that was only because he DIDNT SHOW UP AT THE MEETING TO VOTE AT ALL!’

It seemed the Town Councillors had little choice but to represent their community, with only one abstention coming from the grumpy Steve Cosser (Con Charterhouse). Three Councillors were absent, including County Councillor for Aaron’s Hill Peter Martin. No surprise there then?

The upshot:

Screen Shot 2018-09-06 at 22.33.45.png

Thanks to the efforts of the people of Godalming round one of the battle to preserve the town from becoming part of greater Guildford has been won. But the war with Waverley planners is to follow.

Godalming town council supported Paul Follows’s proposal to object formally to the development on Aarons Hill. A  formal letter will  be released by the council today (Friday)

Here’s how the Waverley Web has covered the tumultuous events of the past few days.

Godalming residents show Waverley residents how objecting to development in the green belt should be done.

Godalming residents show Waverley residents how objecting to development in the green belt should be done.

 

Will Godalming​ get the traffic​ chaos and Guildford get the bunce?

 

Last night Guildford Borough Council decided to forge ahead with its plans to join Guildford with Godalming putting almost 500 homes on the boroughs’ borders at Aaron’s Hill.

EashingLaneGreenBelt

You can read the complete report that was considered by Guildford BC’s Executive when it agreed to waive the call-in procedure and agree to the inclusion in the Local Plan to allow Ashill to build 200+ homes adjacent to the 263+ planned by ‘Your Waverley’ on the green belt boundary between the towns “immediately.’

But new Liberal Democrat Councillor Paul Follows questioned the Guildford Executive’s decision asking how the extra burden of traffic and services on Godalming would be dealt with? It’s the same field – but half the residents would not get ANY services from Godalming!!!! Guildford will provide!

WW wonders why the Conservative councillors, supposedly serving their electors in Godalming are silent on the subject? Surely such an important strategic green belt site in the countryside that is now ‘an urban extension to Godalming’, must be of some concern to them too?

WW has heard that other than Councillor Follows and residents of his ward NOBODY, yes, NOBODY from Waverley attended. Not attending another boroughs executive when it’s this important? 

Also, Cllr Tony Rooth, IND (former Tory, Pilgrims Ward) had a crack at suggesting that the Aaron’s Hill bit be shelved but he was immediately trodden on from a great height by Guildford BC’s chairperson and his successor as leader. But full marks to him for having a go.

 The ‘masterplanning’ bit was obviously a total nonsense. Clearly, a full site plan exists.

Screen Shot 2018-09-04 at 21.10.56.pngScreen Shot 2018-09-04 at 21.11.12.png

Screen Shot 2018-09-04 at 21.11.43

Let’s read that second answer from Guildford again: “We do not envisage that these homes will rely on services provided by Waverley Borough Council, which Guildford Borough Council would normally provide” And presumably not rely on any services from Godalming Town Council either?
• Will they be banned from the Wilfrid Noyce?
• Will they be excluded from the Godalming cemetery next door?
• Will they be uninvited to Godalming Farmers markets?!
• Will all the residents be shopping and parking in Shackleford (whose Parish they are now in)?!

It’s not as easy as Guildford Councillors are suggesting! What’s more, they know it, Waverley planners know it, and WE KNOW KNOW IT DON”T WE? Because more and more people are reading the Waverley Web!

Screen Shot 2018-09-04 at 21.13.21

Godalming residents show Waverley residents how objecting to development in the green belt should be done.

GBC Questions: Supplementary Information Sheet

Godalming residents show Waverley residents how objecting to development in the green belt​ should be done.

 Residents have decided they will not sit idly by and watch Godalming become Godawfulming or become part of Greater Guildford.

So they have put together a 72-page dossier that ‘Your Waverley’ will have to weigh-in rather than register!

Waverley’s new boy – Councillor Paul Follows – is it only six months since he was elected – seems like years – is, quite obviously, having an impact on the town he serves.  Because the good folk of Godalming are in fight-mode and planners may find it more difficult to support the spread of concrete across the green belt than they first thought? The proposed and combined development – a further 200 plus homes for Guildford would be the largest single expansion of the Godalming settlement boundary.

At a stroke, it would increase the population of Godalming by 4-5% and 8-10% taking the Guildford site into consideration.

objectionsubmitted.jpgResidents say the proposed development by Ashill in Eashing Lane ‘will have profound and long-lasting consequences for the whole of Godalming as well as the surrounding immediate area.’

You can read here why Godalming residents are so incensed by the bid to build 200+ homes on a site which has been included in the Local Plan, by rolling back the green belt.

WW wonders why the Tory councillors were so silent about the land being included in the Local Plan in the first place? 

Godalming Ashill Development is getting the bumsrush from residents.

Here’s the link to the 79 Page Objection Letter

Ignore the people of Godalming at your peril Waverley Planners!

Godalming Town Council will consider the application at the Town Council Meeting on Thursday 6th September at the Waverley Council Chamber.

Godalming Ashill Development is getting the bumsrush from residents.

Godalming residents are waking up and smelling the concrete that could be about to cover part of the town’s once protective green belt.

If recent planning officer recommendations are anything to go by its a given. The mantra in ‘Your Waverley’s ‘ planning department is – ‘if it doesn’t move grant permission!’

Last night at Western Planning officers were quite happy to convert a shed into a house near Farnham Castle’s Conservation Area!!

Residents are beginning to question why farmland should be removed from the Green Belt to provide more housing in Eashing Lane. Some residents are posting videos on the Godalming Community Board generating over a 100 comments in the GREAT GODALMING GREEN BELT DEBATE

  • What do they get in return for 262 houses?
  • A mystery Community Building and a footpath into an existing field they are calling a ‘new Country Park’ – (as it’s too steep to build houses on!)
  • More traffic?
  • Services under stress?

Meanwhile, the developers have released a “Community Update Newsletter” ahead of the Planning Application consultation closing this week.

ashill

Here is the link to download the newsletter.

Respond NOW! here to Waverley by Friday 31st August for WA/2018/1239

One resident and video poster Nina M has also started a petition, which we would like to bring to your attention, seeking to “Ask Waverley BC to rethink housebuilding & reject Ashill development on greenfield land”

Good Luck – We’ve seen how the  East of the Borough, has been treated without the area benefitting from  Green Belt protection! As councillors sat with their hands in the air consenting development after development even on floodplains, they called it ‘Poor Old Cranleigh.”

No doubt they will stick their hands in the air and call our town – “Poor Old Godawfulming!’

Not a single Conservative Councillor has responded as to WHY they took this land out of Green Belt, as opposed to any other space, given the very narrow roads into Godalming or the bottleneck that is the A3 to Guildford.

Perhaps they will break the habit of a lifetime and write to us here at contact@waverleyweb.org

Please,​ Sir can we have some more… (houses)?

please_sir

Never has the division between Town and Gown been starker than in Godalming at (Charterhouse School) and in Cranleigh – at (Cranleigh School!) Both private schools want to flog off their Green Belt playing fields to secure their futures!

Here’s the public presentation that was given by Charterhouse School to justify building 132 houses on their Broom & Lees playing fields. Cranleigh School’s offering is still on the blackboard!

SP_Broadway_Charterhouse_Presentation

Screen Shot 2018-08-21 at 18.05.04.png

What struck us here at the WW was how out of touch / desperate was Charterhouse School’s justification for concreting over the green belt: Can’t help wondering if the Campaign for the Protection of some parts of Rural England, or perhaps even Protect ~Our Waverley, will have their say? Or, are they too busy girding their loins to stop development on the largest brownfield site in the borough at the Judicial Review due this Autumn?

The Broom and Lees Playing Field is Green Belt land. However, we believe that the proposed expansion creates a number of ‘Very Special Circumstances’ to justify this development, namely:

  • Providing new School places to widen choice in education
  • Improving the diversity and inclusivity of Charterhouse
  • Protecting and enhancing an established education facility
  • Protecting and enhancing a major local employer
  • Creating additional employment opportunities
  • Investing in and enhancing listed buildingsWithout the funding provided by the sale of Broom and Lees, the expansion and improvement of the School simply cannot proceed.

YOUR FEES ARE £32,364 a year for a day pupil! Surely you don’t have to pave over some of the finest playing fields of England to improve a school whose alumni include:

155px-Jeremy_Hunt_Official.jpg

Jonathan_King_in_2007_cr.jpg

To name just a few!

(left) Jeremy Hunt Foreign Secretary.

(Right) Jonathan King Singer, songwriter, composer and.. lad about town.

 

Just to add insult to injury £174,000 of the 106 monies provided by the developers’ of Cranleigh’s new 450 Berkeley homes, now under construction, has been earmarked for… a new 3G Pitch for Cranleigh School! Alfold Football Club puts its best foot forward – whilst Cranleigh’s 106 monies go to A Cranleigh top fee-paying school!