UPDATE 17 October 2016: Set response from Waverley Leader to multiple residents’ complaints.

Dear xx
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me.
I have now had the opportunity to speak with our Monitoring Officer about this matter and he is satisfied that the meeting was properly managed. He has advised me that there is nothing unusual or improper about the chairman conveying the views of councillors who are not present at the meeting. Whilst I understand that some will be dissatisfied by the decision made by the committee and fully respect the different views held in respect of this planning application, the Council’s Monitoring Officer has confirmed that that the process by which the application was considered and the manner in which a vote was taken and recorded were both done correctly in the usual way.
Yours sincerely,

Julia Potts
Cllr.Julia Potts
Farnham Upper Hale Ward
Leader Waverley Borough Council
01483 523484
07977 443394
END OF UPDATE

Original Article:

After a deferral on the 24 August, the Crest Nicholson application for 149 dwellings came before Waverley Borough Council’s Joint Planning Committee (JPC) again on 3 October 2016 at 7pm.

There was a disappointing turnout for this significant application, with only 15 councillors out of a possible 23 in attendance.

Despite numerous comments and concerns from members of the committee at the previous August meeting, Crest Nicholson had responded with very few changes to the original layout.  However, despite this Planning Officers recommendation was for approval.

Layout submitted in August:

Horsham Road site housing layout Crest Nicholson

 

New layout (spot the difference):

crest-nicholson-amended-plans-september-2016

This was hugely disappointing for residents, who after the August deferral and councillors strong criticisms, particularly regarding the rear parking courts (car parks), were expecting some changes on the northern boundary.

Unfortunately the minimal layout changes and the ongoing legal dispute over ownership of the drainage ditch, into which Crest Nicholson propose to discharge surface water from the site, proved to be no constraint and the application was granted by councillors in a vote of 8 to 7.

Cranleigh’s Borough Councillors Mary Foryszewski and Patricia Ellis fought Cranleigh’s corner, highlighting the high quality of this site, which was now subject to a “poor and uncaring design” not reflective of the area, together with narrow roads that would be unable to accommodate the estimated number of cars, and most importantly the great disservice being done to existing residents. Cranleigh Parish Council also objected to the relatively unchanged plans, the prevalence of parking courts on the northern boundary, issues about sewage capacity and stressed that this was an opportunity to achieve the best possible outcome for existing residents as well as new ones.  Similarly vocal in her support was Farnham Councillor Carole Cockburn who was extremely disappointed and stressed that there had been an opportunity to “do something that works well for everybody” .

In a surprising twist, prior to the vote, the Chairman of the committee, Bramley Councillor Maurice Byham, deviated from normal protocol,  to advise council members that Cranleigh Councillors Jeanette and Stewart Stennett were “happy” with the new scheme and had informed the developers’ agents [Savills]. The couple, he went on to expand, were on holiday in Australia and therefore unable to attend the meeting, however apparently they were watching it closely. Obviously not much going on in Oz at 5am in the morning!

In all of the planning applications that we have attended we have never heard comments read out from councillors not in attendance, or comments that were not officially lodged against the application, or those, as was implied by the Chairman, were personal statements from councillors direct to a developers agent.

You can hear it for yourselves:

To say we were taken aback by this announcement prior to the vote, which might be viewed by some as an attempt to gather support for the development, would be an understatement.

If you share our concerns please ask Julia Potts the Leader of Waverley Borough Council to explain the decision to use absent councillors comments, and whether the monitoring officer’s approval was sought and given prior to the meeting. Please copy in the Cranleigh Society to your email and your MP Anne Milton.

Email addresses:

Julia Potts julia.potts@waverley.gov.uk

Anne Milton anne.milton.mp@parliament.uk

Cranleigh Society info@cranleighsociety.org