News roundup, week ending 14 June

Another quiet week, really, here in Haslemere.  Nothing specific to the town going on, no letters from “Disgusted of Shepherd’s Hill” about the colour of railings.

The front page of the Herald is largely taken up with a report on the failure of Waverley Borough Council’s “Core Strategy”, the document which sets out the overall guidelines for the borough’s planning policy for the next ten years.  This has been rejected by the Inspector as not fit for purpose.  For anyone who is interested, you can read more about the Inspector’s proceedings on the Waverley Matters blog, operated by moles in the Borough Council’s Godalming offices.

If you have a mind to read the Core Strategy, first obtain a supply of intravenous caffeine.  These documents are notoriously dry.  They are however also very important – the borough, as planning authority for the area, can set guidelines on development in a number of areas, including importantly housing, within the context of the National Planning Policy Framework, and in the absence of a Core Strategy, planning policy has to fall back on the NPPF itself.  This is the position Waverly now faces, and some view this as a potential disaster as they consider it offers open season to development which local residents may be powerless to oppose.  See for example today's post on Waverley Matters, "Let the Goldrush Begin".  This one is on the opposite side of the Borough, at Alfold, but don't fret, no doubt it will be coming to a cinema near you before long!

 

Certainly elements of the NPPF on “sustainable development” have caused considerable alarm in national bodies such as the National Trust, Council for Protection of Rural England, wildlife charities etc.

The Inspector’s problem with the Waverley Core Strategy seems to be largely about the borough’s proposals for meeting housing demand.  In essence, the Inspector’s objections are (a) they propose a rate of supply (230 new homes per year) which is woefully inadequate to demand, (b) they are failing to engage with neighbouring authorities on housing planning, and are in effect hoping that East Hampshire, Rushmoor etc will plug the gap for them, and (c) their assessment of need in the core strategy has no sound basis, and is more or less “think of a number, then halve it”.

A lot of attention has been paid to the old Dunsfold aerodrome site, for which its current owners have been attempting to get permission to build a sizeable new housing estate of “eco-homes”.  Waverley rejected their application and there has been a long appeals process which I assume the owners have lost.  Now they are proposing to develop Dunsfold as an airport, which if anything has upset the neighbours even more than housing.

The borough’s objections to housing at Dunsfold don’t sound unreasonable to me – putting about 1,000 or more homes in the middle of nowhere, with at-best mediocre road and transport links to the neighbouring towns, would create pollution and congestion from all the cars coming and going, and no doubt create serious parking issues for Godalming in particular, as the nearest railway town.  No-one with a brain buys the notion that an “eco-town” which undertakes to provide sustainable transport options and opportunities for employment on site which remove the need for commuting will actually deliver what it promises – private developers have no enforceable responsibilities for this and once the genie is out of the bottle.....

However, the alternatives may well be worse.  As also reported in Waverley Matters, the borough may have been earmarking green-field sites around Cranleigh for development when Dunsfold, technically a “brownfield” site, could have been used instead.  And if the borough puts its head in the sand over housing development generally, the eventual outcome could in fact be far worse as unrestrained development takes hold.

It seems as though the current Tory administration is frightened of the backlash it would likely face from “Nimbies” if it agrees to a sensible level of new housing provision, especially with an election coming up in 2015.  If the electors cotton on to what has happened now, their wrath may in fact be more fearsome than the current administration had ever feared!

Residents schemes arrive in Haslemere

The letter below (shown in “mail-merge” format) should by now have been received by all residents in the roads for which a residents permit scheme has been approved.

You-know-who has given us plebs a further update on what she has been doing for the last fortnight – seems to be about as much as she had done in the preceding week (sic). http://www.haslemerefirst.com/councillor-barton-round-up-27-may-9-june-2013/
 

Items of note:

3. Support for Haslemere Businesses: Received a letter from owner of High Street business setting out the current crisis facing shops and businesses in Haslemere High Street.

Sent invitation to the 5 Haslemere Borough Councillors, Haslemere Town Council and Chamber of Trade and other businesses to meet to explore how, as elected representatives of the community, we can work together to support the economic vitality of the community. Meeting planned for next week to discuss possible initiatives.

Work together?  Given the intemperate accusations, bordering on libel, levelled at some of our borough councillors by individuals in Mrs B’s retinue, I should imagine that will be a tough one.   However I have always admired the forbearance they have shown in the face of such sewage, so I imagine they will show willing.

4. South West Area Briefing for Local Committee Members, Shalford Village Hall.

... It will be made clear to the public that LAC meetings are private decision making meetings held in public.

Stone me!  And there was I thinking that local committee meetings were open fora for any nutter to bang on about whatever happens to offend them today.

I am concerned that there has been an apparent failure to address some of the key issues we faced during the parking saga, for example ill informed discussions between Committee members about a very detailed local parking issues leading to poor decisions being made observed by frustrated local residents sitting in the audience unable to intervene to point out substantive and material errors in the evidence forming the basis of the decisions being taken. I intend to pursue my concerns on this point going forward.

My distinct impression from the January meeting was that the Beech Road scheme may well have fallen by the wayside as a result of the confusion created by one SCC councillor, Councillor Munro, who evidently had a weak grip on the facts about Beech Rd, thinking that the proposal was for a waiting restriction, which would be arduous to police, whereas it was a curfew restriction for a specified period, which would be easy to police. On that basis Mrs B might well reflect that perhaps ignorance is bliss?

"A day in the life" (of Derby Road East)

I read the news today, Oh Boy!
Ten thousand holes in Blackburn, Lancashire,
and though the holes were very small,
I had to count them all.
Now I know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall,
I'd love to tũũũũũũrn yoũũũũũũ  õõõõõõn